European research spending for renewable energy sources
15
PROJECT REPORT
EUR 21346
KI-NA-21346-EN-C
This publication aims to give a clear picture of the Research, Technological Development and Demonstration (RTD&D) spending in the field of renewables in Europe. Based on a questionnaire methodology, it provides data on the public and private sectors, on the national and EU spending and on the number of personnel involved in renewable energy RTD&D. This report also highlights issues such as the ratio between renewable research spending and GDP and the correlations between the public and the private spending for each Member State.
European research spending for renewable energy sources
SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT, GLOBAL CHANGE AND ECOSYSTEMS
Interested in European research? RTD info is our quarterly magazine keeping you in touch with main developments (results, programmes, events, etc.). It is available in English, French and German. A free sample copy or free subscription can be obtained from: European Commission Directorate-General for Research Information and Communication Unit B-1049 Brussels Fax (32-2) 29-58220 E-mail: [email protected] Internet: http://europa.eu.int/comm/research/rtdinfo/index_en.html
SALES AND SUBSCRIPTIONS Publications for sale produced by the Office for Official Publications of the European Communities are available from our sales agents throughout the world. How do I set about obtaining a publication? Once you have obtained the list of sales agents, contact the sales agent of your choice and place your order. How do I obtain the list of sales agents? • •
EUROPEAN COMMISSION Directorate-General for Research Directorate J — Energy Unit J.3 — New and renewable energy sources Contact: Domenico Rossetti di Valdalbero European Commission Office CDMA 5/142 B-1049 Brussels Tel. (32-2) 29-62811 Fax (32-2) 29-94991 E-mail: [email protected]
Go to the Publications Office website http://publications.eu.int/ Or apply for a paper copy by fax (352) 2929 42758
EUROPEAN COMMISSION
European research spending for renewable energy sources
2004
Directorate-General for Research Sustainable Energy Systems
EUR 21346
Europe Direct is a service to help you find answers to your questions about the European Union Freephone number:
00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11 LEGAL NOTICE: Neither the European Commission nor any person acting on behalf of the Commission is responsible for the use which might be made of the following information. The views expressed in this publication are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the European Commission. A great deal of additional information on the European Union is available on the Internet. It can be accessed through the Europa server (http://europa.eu.int). Cataloguing data can be found at the end of this publication. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, 2004 ISBN 92-894-8286-9 © European Communities, 2004 Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged. Printed in Luxembourg PRINTED
ON WHITE CHLORINE-FREE PAPER
TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................5 BACKGROUND .............................................................................................................................6 METHODOLOGY ...........................................................................................................................7 DATA COLLECTION .......................................................................................................................9 EVALUATION OF DATA CONSISTENCY ..........................................................................................15 EVIDENCE FROM DATA COLLECTED AND ELABORATION OF PERFORMANCE INDICATORS ................17 Sector specific distribution of RTD&D budget........................................................................19 Correlation between governmental and private spending .......................................................20 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ......................................................................................21 REFERENCES..............................................................................................................................23 WEB SITES .................................................................................................................................24 CONTACT PERSONS ....................................................................................................................25
3
Introduction
Very little information is available on research, technological development and demonstration (RTD&D) spending in the specific field of renewable energy sources (RES) in Europe. There were three objectives of this Specific Support Action funded by the European Union (EU): • to gain a clear picture of the public and private research spending in the field of renewables; • to arrive at an approximate distribution between Member States and EU research spending; • to evaluate each Member State’s share of the research spending in the last decade. The most important results from this study are that: • • •
more than half of the renewable energy research is done by the public sector; one quarter of the public spending comes directly from the EU budget; one third of the EU-15 Government research spending and half of the personnel working on research for renewables are from Germany. Denmark and The Netherlands have the highest ratio of research spending on renewables in comparison to their GDP.
The results of this study may help to define a European research policy in the field of renewables thus contributing to the creation and implementation of the European Research Area. Also, they can be used in developing a better framework for introduction of renewables in the European energy system. This is an important goal of the EU as underlined in the renewable electricity directive 2001/77/EC. Taking into consideration three major objectives of the EU, i.e. ensuring a better security of energy supply, considerably increasing the production of green electricity and reducing greenhouse gas emissions, it seems necessary to increase the efforts dedicated to research spending on renewables both at the national and European levels and to better coordinate and integrate these efforts in Europe. Three research teams were involved in the REDS (Research & Development Spending: a survey of RTD&D spending on renewable energy in the EU countries) project: Arturo Lorenzoni, the Coordinator), Samuele Larzeni, Nicoletta Marigo and Apollonia Miola from Università Commerciale Luigi Bocconi (IEFE) in Italy, Mario Ragwitz from Fraunhofer Institute Systems and Innovation Research (FhG ISI) in Germany and Emiel Hanekamp and Cees Van Halen from PriceWaterhouseCoopers in The Netherlands. The authors were assisted by experts in the different EU Member States.
5
Background Energy RD&D activity in the EU has been the object of two European projects, the JOULESENSER project (Olthof, 1998) and its follow-up the JOULE-PSI (Bruel, 2000), as well as of international studies like the one conducted by the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (Energy Trends, 2002). Although these studies do not focus specifically on renewable energy sources (RES), they were, together with the Eurostat database which also contains useful data, briefly reviewed and their relevance to the REDS project assessed. At present the most important international source for RES RD&D spending is the IEA database on energy RD&D budgets of OECD countries. The primary objective of REDS was to conduct an analytical survey of RD&D expenditure for renewable energy sources (RES) in the EU and the 15 Member States. To reach this goal a comprehensive set of data, spanning from 1993 to 2001, was collected through a questionnaire specifically designed by the project’s partners and completed by national experts for each EU country. The survey’s methodological approach and its content were widely discussed between the core team partners. All the data on RES RD&D expenditure have been collected and stored in a database that is available on the REDS website: www.eu.fraunhofer.de/reds. Some comments on the availability of data both from private and government sources are summarised in Table 1. For many countries part of data, often private funds or funds paid by local governmental bodies, are not monitored and thus could not be included in the database. As a consequence, in spite of the effort made in the project work to enhance the quality of data, the REDS database is still incomplete. Table 1. Considerations about international available data on RTD&D for RES
Government Expenditures
Recent data could only be found in the IEA database. However, attention should be paid to the comments and values given by the REDS experts, since it seems that for some countries, not all IEA data were complete due to the lack of part of the funds given, especially from local governmental institutions. Some international figures on private R&D expenditures were available only from PNNLBattelle project and SENSER. Unfortunately they were very incomplete and cover only few EU countries and years. However, this data was still useful to make a comparison with data collected in REDS. None of the existing databases contains disaggregated figures on the personnel involved in RTD&D.
Private Expenditures
Personnel
Even if data were missing in the previous works, the cited projects and the IEA database were used in REDS for general comparison purposes. The existent literature provided also limited methodological indications upon which the REDS project could ground itself.
6
Methodology The first activity of the project was to set out the methodology for data collection and to establish the guidelines for the questionnaire design. Critical actions consisted in: - setting the boundaries of the study in terms of data to be collected and to be excluded; - specifying the details and the criteria for acquiring the data: the coherence of collected data is crucial when so many sources of information is used; - providing definitions to obtain reliable and comparable statistics. Considering the limited time available (1 year) and the scale of the effort (collecting RD&D expenditures for renewable energy sources for the 15 Member States) it was essential to adopt a pragmatic approach that would allow to collect good quality data and to elaborate a convincing methodology. This consisted in designing a concentric circle framework within which to set the priorities for data collection. Figure 1. REDS boundaries and priorities
Government national RD&D expenditure for RES
Gov. regional RD&D expend. for RES
Other sectors of the economy RD&D expend. for RES
Gov. personnel involved in RD&D for RES
Efficiency expenditure indicators
In the inner circle were located the data that must be gathered to fulfil the project objectives. These pertained to government RD&D expenditure for RES at the national level only. The second and the third outer circles included data (such as government RD&D expenditure at the local level and expenditure made by private companies), that are in general more scattered and difficult to obtain than the previous ones. It was decided that these data should also be collected despite being less critical to achieve the project objectives and probably less accurate and reliable than the ones pertaining to public RD&D expenditure at the national level. The most outer circles contained data (such as personnel involved in RD&D and efficiency expenditure indicators) that could be useful to complete the picture but, if not collected, were not going to undermine the project goals. In order to obtain reliable and comparable data, REDS paid a particular attention to definitions. The OECD Frascati Manual (OECD, 2002) was used as a reference for RD&D and personnel definitions. This choice was undertaken because the methodology indicated by the Manual represents a wellconsolidated praxis and allows for comparison between countries. The definition for the different RES was instead elaborated by taking into account both the one put forth in the Directive
7
2001/77/EC and by the IEA (IEA Energy Statistics, 2004), but also those adopted by the 15 Member States. This approach was necessary, in the presence of multiple definitions, to harmonise all the existent discrepancies that could lead to inconsistency in data collections. To assess the RD&D expenditure for RES in the different member states it was necessary to have a direct insight into the respective national markets. For this reason the project’s team worked together with experts appropriately selected in the different European countries. It was decided to exploit, where possible, personal contacts within academic or other European institutions (Table 2 provides a list of the experts who completed the questionnaire). This was done first of all to exert a greater control on the data to be collected by allowing a continuous exchange of information between the REDS project partners and the experts, but it was also done for practical reasons to optimise the use of limited amount of resources and time. Some recommendations can be derived from REDS in relation to the methodology for RD&D data collection: - a pragmatic approach is crucial when a lot of data should be collected across many different countries and when the time and the financial resources available are limited; - importance of networks for effective results. The choice of exploiting research and scientific contacts to provide the necessary data has proven to be a winning one. - importance of a trial and error approach. The elaboration of a sound and straightforward methodology was the result of a lengthy process that involved all the project partners. This approach proved to be very effective in enhancing clarity and simplicity. Table 2. REDS experts who filled the country questionnaires and corresponding IEA contacts Country Austria
REDS experts Name and email Institute Gerhard Faninger IFF (Institut fur interdisziplinare [email protected] Forschung und Fortbildung)
Belgium
Mario Ragwitz
Denmark
IEA contacts ABARE
FhG-ISI (Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and Innovation Research)
Ministry of Economic Affairs
[email protected] Peter Helby
Lund University
Finland
[email protected] Eija Alakangas
VTT
France
[email protected] Boris Bailly
Service Economie-Prospective
Danish Energy Agency and Ministry of Environment and Energy Energy Department, Ministry of Trade and Industry Ministère de l'économie, des finances et de l'industrie, DGEMP
[email protected] Germany
Mario Ragwitz
FhG-ISI (Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and Innovation Research)
Greece
[email protected] Calliope Panoutsou [email protected]
CRES
Ireland
Therese Murphy
Sustainable Energy Ireland
[email protected] Italy
Samuele Larzeni
IEFE (Istituto di Economia e Politica dell'Energia e dell'Ambiente, [email protected] Università Commerciale L. Bocconi)
8
Federal Ministry of Economics and Technology Ministry of Industry, Energy & Technology International & Sustainable Energy Division, Dpt. of Public Ent. and Sust. Energy Division Ministero delle Attività Produttive
Luxembourg
Emiel Hanekamp [email protected]
HE Environmental & Innovation Consultancy (NL)
Portugal
Alvaro Martins
The Netherlands
[email protected] Esther Schouten [email protected]
CEEETA (Centro de Estudos em Economia da Energia dos Transportese do Ambiente) PricewaterhouseCoopers (NL)
Departimento de Planeamento e Estatistidca, DG Energia Ministry of Economic Affairs
Universidad Pontificia Comillas
Ministerio de Industria y Energia Swedish National Energy Administration Department of Trade and Industry
Spain Sweden United Kingdom
Julio Montes Ponce de Leon [email protected] Peter Helby [email protected] Robert Gross [email protected]
Lund University Imperial College -ICCEPT Department of Environmental S&T
Data collection The project’s core activity was the data collection. This phase resulted to be rather difficult and time consuming, in part for the lack of previous work in this field and in part for the non-availability of some of the data under investigation. Although the International Energy Agency (IEA) RD&D database was used as benchmark, a great care was taken in designing the questionnaire. This was designed to allow for harmonised data collection and to ease the task of transferring and storing the information obtained in an ad hoc created database. Figures that have been considered of interest for the project reflect the priorities previously described in the “concentric circle” approach and include: government expenditures at both the national and the regional level, personnel involved in RD&D for RES and some data useful to calculate efficiency expenditure indicators to analyse the effectiveness of the financial support devoted to RD&D for RES. The structure of financing has also been investigated in order to understand the flows of expenditure and to avoid the double counting of funds redistributed by public institutions to RD&D performers. It was decided to customise the questionnaire for each Country in order to take into account the funds given by local administrations. Figure 2 shows the lay out of the final questionnaire, with comments to guide the respondents. Where official information was not available, experts were asked to give their own estimates on the basis of information available. In order to appreciate the reliability of these figures, a confidence indicator ranging from 0 (absolutely unreliable) to 10 (maximum reliability of data) had to accompany the data. Furthermore it was also asked to integrate the data with comments considered useful by the respondents for a better understanding of the data provided. The confidence indicator and the comments were precious in the following phase of data interpretation. The data collection process was carried out in strict contact with national partners in each EU member state. A brief guideline for approaching the data collection was distributed to the experts and some preliminary sources of information were also suggested. The outcome of the process is a database where data coming from the fifteen competed questionnaires were merged. Its structure mirrors that of the questionnaire: - structure and budget of financing; -
program funding and expenditures;
-
government expenditures (national and regional level);
-
government personnel in full time equivalent and headcount;
-
RD&D expenditures and personnel of other sectors of economy;
-
data for performance indicators.
9
GOV
France
Sector of economy: Administrative level:
Instructions Government NUTS 2 It considers the SUM OF To know what the LEVEL NUTS 2 expenditures at the LEVEL corresponds in your Country click on the NUTS 2 of the Government Sector, button here below: that is what the entities in level NUTS 2 spend, all together, for the Levels NUTS technologies listed below.
2001
2000
1999
1998
need to know nice to know
1997
1996
1995
1994
1993
% budget Budget assigned by this administrative level to R&D for RES compared with the total spending in Government Sector (all the levels national and NUTS 2). This percentage will give how much the level NUTS 2 weights on the governmental financing.
10
RD&D expenditures for RES Millions, National Currencies Total R&D expenditures for RES of entities of level NUTS 2 Biomass Geothermal Hydro Biogas, Landfill and sewage gas Solar Photovoltaics Solar thermal Other Solar Tide energy Wave energy Wind Other
Figure 2 Example of questionnaire (France) - part of the sheet "Government Expenditures Regions (Lorraine, etc.)"; comments are not shown.
1992
The data available in the database are in national currency but conversions in Euro 2002 are also provided. The milestones for the data collection can be summarised as follows: - implementation of clear questionnaires; -
personal contacts in each country;
-
close collaboration and assistance to national collaborators;
-
continue verification of the process.
Some data from the REDS database are provided in the tables below.
Table 3. Government Expenditures for RTD&D for RES (Million Euro 2002)
Country
2001
2000
1999
1998
1997
1996
1995
1994
1993
8.0
6.7
9.7
10.3
7.9
6.5
-
-
-
BE - Belgium DE - Germany
12.4 113.8
6.6 130.8
3.1 144.5
1.0 158.2
2.2 146.7
2.0 158.4
4.5 130.8
3.7 -
3.4 -
DK - Denmark EL - Greece ES - Spain FI - Finland FR - France IE - Ireland IT - Italy LU - Luxembourg NL - The Netherlands PT - Portugal SE - Sweden UK - United Kingdom
25.9 2.6 25.4 13.1 18.3 0.3 25.8 0.3 51.9 0.9 25.1 32.5
2.0 18.4 13.5 13.5 0.8 30.0 41.4 0.8 24.6 21.4
2.2 17.0 13.0 26.1 44.5 1.4 29.3 -
2.5 22.0 4.0 34.3 42.9 1.3 24.6 -
3.3 16.0 3.0 36.8 38.9 0.6 -
3.3 4.8 39.9 29.4 1.2 -
6.0 5.1 42.6 24.5 0.6 -
3.4 5.2 31.3 0.6 -
3.0 5.5 27.7 1.6 -
AT - Austria
11
Table 4. Personnel working on RTD&D for RES in the Government Sector in 2001, expressed in Full Time Equivalent (FTE) and Headcount (i.e. including persons only partly working on renewables).
The personnel are disaggregated per Energy Source, occupation and qualification. The selected countries have a significant quantity of data collected on this matter. FTE Energy source Total RTD&D personnel for RES in the Government Sector Biomass Geothermal Hydro Biogas, landfill and sewage gas Solar Photovoltaics Solar thermal
Headcount
AT DE DK ES
IT
IT
UK
114 869 196 178 164 114 1217 214 233 164 35 92 59 30 45 35 129 40 195 45 5 75 0 -0 5 105 -0 0 15 8 0 -0 15 11 -5 0
438 93 0 3
5 -15 30
0 6 -0 410 53 133 116 460 19 35 50 26 34 90 60
AT DE
ES
FI
5 -15 30
0 -574 154 644 44 36 100
0 10 ---
0 116 50 60
22 173 170 3
Other Solar Tide energy
3 0
9 0
0 0
8 --
6 0
3 0
13 0
10 --
-0
6 0
0 6
Wave energy Wind
0 4
0 55
0 18
-15
0 3
0 4
0 77
-20
0 23
0 3
17 60
Other RES
2
145 41
--
0
2
203
--
--
0
64
Occupation Researchers
100 652
--
92
97
100 913 109
--
97
--
Technicians and equivalent Other support staff
14 --
152 65
---
71 15
40 26
14 --
213 91
85 20
---
40 26
---
80
--
--
31
0
14
--
15
--
10
--
0
--
--
32
0
80
--.
35
--
--
--
0
--
--
15
63
--
--
44
--
--
--
0
--
--
0
0
--
--
25
--
63
--
20 14
---
---
90 10
91 10
-20
---.
0 95
---
-91
---
Qualification University degrees at PhD level Other post-secondary non tertiary diplomas Diplomas of secondary education Other tertiary level diplomas Basic university degrees below the PhD level Other qualifications
12
Table 5. Expenditures and personnel involved in RTD&D for RES in the Other sectors of economy
(Business enterprise, Higher Education and Private non-profit sectors) in 2001. The selected countries have a significant quantity of data collected on this matter. AT FI FR DE IT LU PT ES NL Private Expenditures (Meuro 2002) Business enterprise Higher Education Private non-profit Total
3.1 38.5 34.6 142.3 7.5 ---- 27.4 -1.5 -- 0.0 0.0 -4.6 38.5 34.6 182.9 7.5
0.3 --0.3
0.3 0.4 0.4 1.1
Personnel (Headcount) Business enterprise Higher Education Private non-profit Total Headcount
30 -15 45
-----
-----
500 770 0 1270
-0 ---
-----
23 10 0 33
-----
Business enterprise Higher Education
30 --
---
---
357 34.5 550 --
-0
---
---
---
Private non-profit
15
--
--
--
--
--
--
Total FTE
45
--
--
--
--
--
--
47 --47
4.7 60.9 0.3 -0.0 -5.1 65,7
Personnel (FTE)
0
--
907 34.5
Table 6. Total expenditures per EU Country on RTD&D for RES in 2001 (Million Euro 2002)
Countries
Government Sector
Other Sectors
Total Expenditure
AT
7.9
4.6
12.5
BE
12.1
n.a.
12.1
DE
111.9
182.9
294.8
DK
24.0
n.a.
24.0
EL
2.5
n.a.
2.5
ES
24.6
5.1
29.7
FI
13.1
38.5
51.6
FR
18.0
34.6
52.6
IE
0.3
n.a.
0.3
IT
25.2
7.5
32.7
LU
0.3
0
0.3
NL
50.0
65.7
115.7
PT
0.9
1.1
2.0
SE
30.1
n.a.
30.1
UK
28.3
n.a.
28.3
349.3
340.0
689.3
Total EU countries
13
An important outcome of REDS was to find out there are not complete international data on private expenditures, nor even on the personnel involved in RD&D in the renewable energy sector. The REDS database on RD&D expenditures for RES results to be comparable with the IEA one, further improving and completing the data it contains. The main difference, apart from the recovery of some missing data, consists in the inclusion of local government funds and private expenditures, which are not included in the IEA database nor in other previous studies. From the aggregation of IEA and REDS databases, a complete snapshot of the expenditure for RD&D for the renewable energy sector in the Government Sector can be obtained, as shown in Table 7. The relation between the definition of technologies is shown in Table 8. Table 7. Government Expenditures for RTD&D for RES (Million Euros 2002).
Country
2001
2000
1999
1998
1997
1996
1995
1994
1993
AT BE DE DK EL
8.0 12.4 113.8 25.9 2.6
6.7 6.6 130.8 16.9 2.0
9.6 3.1 144.5 16.9 2.2
10.3 1.0 158.2 19.7 2.5
7.8 2.2 146.7 17.9 3.3
6.5 2.0 158.4 13.9 3.3
8.4 4.5 130.8 17.3 6.0
7.2 3.7 84.9 18.5 3.4
5.6 3.4 128.5 21.3 3.0
ES FI
25.5 13.3
18.6 13.7
17.1 9.6
22.3 8.7
16.4 12.0
15.5 7.4
15.4 5.9
15.7 5.7
22.1 6.0
FR IE
18.3 0.3
13.5 0.8
13.0 --
4.0 --
2.9 --
4.8 --
5.1 --
5.2 --
5.5 --
IT LU
25.8 0.3
30.0 0.0
26.1 0.0
34.3 0.0
36.8 0.0
39.9 0.0
42.6 0.0
31.3 0.0
27.7 0.0
NL PT
51.1 0.9
39.5 0.8
41.2 1.4
39.3 1.3
35.4 0.6
26.7 1.2
22.3 0.5
25.1 0.6
20.1 1.4
SE UK Total
25.3 25.3 32.5 21.4 356.1 326.8
30.9 26.5 7.9 5.7 323.5 333.8
8.8 8.6 13.8 18.2 15.2 7.7 11.4 17.5 17.9 30.2 298.6 299.7 290.1 237.3 290.0
Sources: REDS (black values) and IEA (blue values) databases.
Table 8. Relations between IEA and REDS RES technology definitions
REDS Total Biomass Hydro Biogas, landfill and sewage gas Solar Photovoltaics Solar thermal Other solar Tide energy Wave energy Wind
IEA Total renewable energy Biomass Total hydro Biomass Total solar Solar photo-electric Solar thermal-electric Solar heating & cooling Ocean Ocean Wind
14
Evaluation of data consistency The completeness of the data collected was checked in the evaluation phase and a cross-national comparison was implemented. The quality of colleted data was evaluated with reference to the quantity, quality and validity, as shown in Table 7. The main conclusion of the evaluation process was that the consistency of the gathered data is sufficient for a survey of EU spending on RTD&D in the field of RES, but it could be improved and kept updated under a new project. The area where most difficulties were met in finding reliable information is the structure of financing. REDS effort in reconstructing the flows of funds from the sources to the research performers did not supply a clear picture because in many countries the channels of financing are quite diverse and dispersed. The role of private financers did not result to be clear in many countries.
Table 7. Overall REDS assessment per country
Country
Validity
Quality
Quantity
Austria
Good
Good
Good
Belgium
Sufficient
Moderate
Moderate
Denmark
Sufficient
Moderate
Sufficient
Finland
Sufficient
Good
Good
France
Sufficient
Moderate
Moderate
Germany
Good
Good
Good
Greece
Poor
Poor
Poor
Ireland
Sufficient
Sufficient
Moderate
Italy
Good
Sufficient
Good
Luxembourg
Sufficient
Moderate
Poor
Portugal
Sufficient
Sufficient
Sufficient
Spain
Moderate
Sufficient
Good
Sweden
Sufficient
Moderate
Sufficient
Netherlands
Good
Good
Sufficient
UK
Sufficient
Good
Good
Source: REDS project. Good
:
data requirements are exceeded
Sufficient
:
complies with data requirements
Moderate
:
attention has been paid to data but not sufficient
Poor
:
not available or totally not in compliance with requirements
This overall evaluation is based on the following conclusions: -
Country data are sufficient considering time and budget constraints;
-
Availability and reliability of ‘Government expenditures for 2000 and 2001 per RES’ varied from country to country;
-
Six countries provided a variety of good quality data, the rest was less successful;
-
In the overall assessment per country, 11 countries have two out of three criteria sufficient or good;
15
-
Comparison of ‘Government expenditures’ and ‘Elaboration of performance indicators’ is possible for most countries;
-
Collected data are sufficient for project goals, as Table 8 on cross country comparison underlines.
Table 8. Cross country evaluation
Country
Availability
Comparability
Austria
Sufficient Good
Good
Belgium Denmark
Moderate Moderate
Finland
Moderate Good
France
Sufficient
Moderate
Germany
Sufficient
Good
Greece
Moderate
Poor
Ireland
Moderate
Sufficient
Italy
Sufficient
Sufficient
Luxembourg
Moderate
Moderate
Portugal
Moderate
Sufficient
Spain
Sufficient
Moderate
Sweden
Moderate
Netherlands
Sufficient Sufficient
UK
Sufficient
Sufficient
Good
Good
Source: REDS project. Good Sufficient Moderate Poor
: : : :
no restrictions for cross country comparison cross country comparison can be performed, some comments needed specific comments needed with results of cross country comparison totally insufficient for cross country comparison
The proposed methodology for data collection has proven to be adequate and workable, even if about half of the countries still need to organise the collection and management of RES RTD&D expenditures. As a result the data currently available are rather poor for some countries. Moreover, different gathering methodologies influenced the quality of the data collected. Table 9 shows the reliability of collected data with reference to the Government expenditures for 2000 and 2001.
16
Table 9. Availability and reliability of most important data (Government expenditures for 2000 and
2001 per RES) per country
Country Austria Belgium Denmark Finland France Germany Greece Ireland Italy Luxembourg Portugal Spain Sweden The Netherlands UK Source: REDS project.
Availability of ‘Government expenditures’ for 2000 and 2001 per RES Available Available Partially available Available Available Available Partially available Partially available Available Partially available Partially available Available Available Available Available
Reliability coefficient* 10 5 4,5 8 9,9 9,1 6 7,8 9 3 no data 9 4,3 8 7
* The average of all reliability coefficients is taken.
Available
=
all data (on RES) is available;
Partially available
=
data is only partially available;
Not available
=
data is not available;
=
data is unreliable (reliability coefficient is < 6 or no data is provided)
Evidence from data collected and elaboration of performance indicators The crude data sometimes are hard to read. For this reason an elaboration of performance indicators for RTD&D spending for renewable energy in the EU countries has been performed on the basis of the collected data, to highlight the commitment of the EU member countries and the success factors in this field. Measuring RTD&D performance poses many problems. This can be related to the nature of the RTD&D activity which is a highly uncertain and lengthy process. Furthermore, being RTD&D only one of the components of much more complex innovation systems it is difficult to establish a direct relation between RTD&D spending and any output. Different indicators can be used to express the RTD&D intensity as well as the RTD&D performance of a country in the sector of renewable energy sources. A number of such indicators, which are rigorously defined in the report, have been evaluated within the REDS project. The project concentrated on the following performance indicators: -
RTD&D intensity, defined as §
incidence of RES RTD&D expenditure of Gross Domestic Product (GDP),
§
ratio of RES RTD&D expenditure and total governmental budget,
17
§
RES RTD&D expenditure per capita,
§
ratio of RES RTD&D expenditure and general RTD&D budget for energy,
§
ratio of RES RTD&D expenditure and total national RTD&D budget;
-
correlation between governmental and private spending;
-
RES RTD&D expenditure per human resources involved in RES RTD&D;
-
RES RTD&D expenditure and number of patents in a specific technological sector.
Figure 3 shows the RTD&D intensity and RES RTD&D intensity. For many countries the RES
RTD&D intensity correlates to the countries’ RTD&D intensity. Only in France and Ireland RES RTD&D intensity seems to be at a lower level. RES RTD&D intensity in Denmark and The Netherlands is the highest of the EU countries.
RD&D expenditure/GDP
4,00%
0,020% 0,018% 0,016% 0,014% 0,012% 0,010% 0,008%
3,50% 3,00% 2,50% 2,00% 1,50%
0,006% 0,004% 0,002% 0,000%
1,00% 0,50%
5 -1 EU
Ita ly bu N et he rg rla nd Po s rtu ga l Sp ai U Sw n ni te ed d en Ki ng do m m
Lu
xe
nd
Ire
la
e
y
ec
an
re G
ce
m er
G
Fr
an
d
k
an
Fi
nl
ar
m
m
iu
en D
lg
Be
Au
st
ria
0,00%
RES RD&D expenditure/GDP
Figure 3. RTD&D intensity (%) and RES RTD&D intensity (%), 2000
RD&D expenditure/GDP (%) RES RD&D expense/GDP (%)
Comparing the ratio of RTD&D expenditures for RES and the total governmental budget of the EU15 countries shows similar differences. Between 1996 and 2001, some Member States spent about 0.02% of their total national budget annually (which is the sum of the budgets of the government level and the regional administration level) while other countries spent 0.01% or less. Denmark, Finland, the Netherlands and Sweden have a leading position in this respect.
Figure 4 shows the relationship between RTD&D budget for RES and RTD&D budget for the
overall energy sector. Excluding France, Ireland and Italy where the RES RTD&D seems to be underrepresented, the expenses for RES increase proportional to the counties budgets for energy research. In Italy, the low share of RES RTD&D with regard to energy RTD&D is somewhat compensated by the fact that the energy sector is the main part of all RTD&D activities, as the ratio of the budget of RTD&D for RES to the total RTD&D budget is in the European average with slightly more than 0.2%. On the other hand, this ratio in France is again the lowest with a value below 0.06%. In Denmark and the Netherlands, the expenses of RTD&D for RES have the largest share of all EU countries with about 0.7% of the total expenses for RTD&D.
18
0,80% 0,70% 0,60% 0,50% 0,40% 0,30% 0,20% 0,10% 0,00%
budget R&D RES / budget R&D
100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0%
Au Be stria D lgiu en m m Fi ark nl a Fr nd a G nc er e m G any re e Ire ce la n N et I d he ta rl ly Po and rtu s g Sp al U ni S a te w in d ed Ki e ng n do m
budget R&D RES / budget R&D energy sector
Figure 4. Ratio of the public budget for RTD&D of RES to the RTD&D budget for the energy sector (blue) and ratio of the public budget for RTD&D of RES to the total RTD&D budget (red)
Country
Sector specific distribution of RTD&D budget
Another important factor arising from the project is that the main focus for funding the RTD&D of renewable energies is put on different sectors depending on the country. In 2001, Germany, France, Italy, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom mainly funded RTD&D in the field of photovoltaic technology, using from 35 % (NL, UK) up to 65 % (IT for all solar technologies) of their total RES RTD&D budget. Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Portugal, Sweden and Finland are putting the greatest emphasis on the RTD&D of biomass, using 30 – 80 % of their RTD&D budgets for this purpose. In Spain, the RTD&D of wind energy is receiving the largest share of the governmental research and development budget amounting to about 35 %. In Spain, Denmark and the Netherlands the budgets seem to be split more equally between the different sectors than in the other countries. The differences between the EU-15 countries can not only be explained with regional differences like the availability of the different renewable energy sources. In fact, it seems to be influenced by many different factors, such as the general industrial and technological structure of a country. In Figure 5 the number of employees and the number of patents (in 2001) is shown as a function of the governmental funding in 2001. Generally no strong correlation between the patent data and RTD&D expenditures can be found although a linear increase of patent output with RTD&D input is suggested. The number of researchers on the other hand could only be gathered with a low degree of reliability in the REDS project. Therefore for the few countries where data on human resources in the sector of PV technology were available a large statistical spread of this data is observed. In this respect Figure 5 illustrates the difficulties encountered in the REDS project, when statistical correlations between RTD&D input and output have been calculated. This explains the fact that most of the indicators calculated in the project focus on RTD&D input rather than on the corresponding output.
19
Figure 5. Human resources and number of patents (right axis) in the photovoltaic sector as a function of the yearly funding of RTD&D of photovoltaics in 2001 by EU countries’ governments
16 DE 14
Number of patents
12 10 8 6
FR UK
4 IT
NL
2 0 0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
R&D input [mill. euro]
Correlation between governmental and private spending
With reference to the correlation between governmental and private spending data Figure 6 shows that a positive correlation is found. Public budgets that are made available for RES RTD&D seem to attract private investment in RTD&D as well. In general, by funding RTD&D projects for RES, the government seems to activate at least the same amount from private sources. Still the figure shows that some countries are more successful in creating a leverage effect to the private market than others. The 2000 data do not differ much from the 2001 data. Generally it has to be emphasised that the data on private expenditures could only be collected with relatively large uncertainty and are expected to be underestimated.
20
Figure 6. Statistical correlation of the governmental and non governmental expenditures for RTD&D of renewable energies
200
non governmental expenditures [€]
DE 180 160 2001
140
2000
120 100 80 60
NL
40
FR
20
ESP
0 0.0
20.0
40.0 60.0 80.0 100.0 governmental expenditures [€]
120.0
140.0
Conclusion and recommendations The database created under REDS project is rather unique in Europe, being focused on RTD&D on renewable energy and, even if it is still incomplete, represents a valuable tool for designing and evaluating national policies and to compare the commitment of the European Member States in the development of renewable energy. An essential step for the success of the project is thus the dissemination of its results and this booklet is aimed to improve the understanding of the policies of the European Member States for research in the field of RES. A comparison of the efforts made and of the output obtained can help the decision makers in making informed choices by being aware of what other countries are doing. The partners of the REDS project are also available to participate to seminars or workshops to discuss the results and possible follow up of the work done. Their contacts can be found at the end of this publication. A final recommendation is related to the EU financing for research activity: a process of improvement of the data collection from international organisations should start, in order to facilitate the interpretation of trends for policy implementation. The inclusion of specific codes for financed research projects (at EU as well as national level) could enhance the knowledge about the financed activities. As a final summary, Figure 7 gives an overall qualitative view of the spending for RES RTD&D in Europe (EU-15), from national and European sources, separating the public and private spending, the national (15 member States) and the EU spending (one fourth of the EU Fifth RTD Framework Programme – 1998-2002).
21
Figure 7. The overall financing of RTD&D for RES in Europe in 2001 (EU and European Member States – Government and Private sector)
800 700 600
Meuro
500 400
Private Sector
300
Government Sector
200 100 0 Total MS
European Union
22
References Bruel, R., Greisberger, H., Indinger, A., van Wees, M., de Laat, B., Clément, D., Linares, P. and Montes, J., 2000, Priority Setting Initiative (PSI), Joule III project, available at http://www.eva.wsr.ac.at/projekte/psi.htm. The project database is available at: http://www.otri.upco.es/psi.htm. Eurec Agency, 2002, In the future for renewable energy – Prospects and directions. The Cromwell Press. EU Directive 2001/77 on the promotion of electricity produced from renewable energy sources in the internal electricity market, OJEC L 283 (27/10/2001). European Commission (1997), Energy for the Future: Renewable Sources of Energy White Paper for a Community Strategy and Action Plan, COM(97)599 final (26/11/97). European Commission (2002), Inventory of public aid granted to different energy sources, Commission staff working paper. Eurostat (2002), Energy and Renewable statistics, Luxembourg. G8 Renewable Energy Taskforce, 2001. Taskforce on Renewable Energy, July. Guy, K, 1998, Strategic Options for the Evaluation of the R&D Programmes of the European Union, http://www.technopolis.co.uk/reports/stoa/title.htm . IEA, statistics and data on RTD&D, OECD, Paris. Lenz, S, 2000, Support of Renewable Energies in different countries, Bremer energie institut, wwwuser.uni-bremen.de/~bei/download/re_support.pdf . Observ’ER (Observatoire des énergies renouvelables), (2003), Energie Renouvelables en Europe : les chiffres clefs, Observatoire des énergies renouvelables. OECD, 2002, Frascati Manual 2002: Proposed Standard Practice for Surveys on Research and Development and Main Science and Technology Indicators, Paris. Olthof R., De Laat B., Clément D., Virdis, M., Smith A., 1998, Synergies between European and National Strategies for Energy RTD, SENSER, Joule III project. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory. pnl.gov/index.htm.
Battelle Memorial Institute, http://energytrends.
World Energy Council, 2001, Energy Technologies for the Twenty-First Century, London.
23
Web sites
http://www.cordis.lu/eesd/src/indicators.htm http://www.jrc.es/cfapp/eneriure/analysis.htm http://www.iea.org/public/studies/curves.htm http://www.etde.org/etdeweb/ µhttp://www.solarpaces.org/legislation.htm http://www.enr-network.org/index2.lw http://www.worldenergy.org/wec-geis/publications/default/launches/et21/et21.asp http://www.otri.upco.es/Psi.htm http://www.eu.fraunhofer.de/reds http://www.iefe.unibocconi.it
24
Contact persons
Domenico Rossetti di Valdalbero and Barry Robertson European Commission, DG Research New and Renewables Energy Sources Unit Rue de la Loi 200, Brussels, B-1049 tel: + 32 2 2950633 fax: + 32 2 2994991 [email protected] Domenico.Rossetti-di-Valdalberoec.eu.int Arturo Lorenzoni IEFE, Università Commerciale Luigi Bocconi viale Filippetti 9, 20122 Milano tel: +39 02 5836 3820 fax: +39 02 5836 3890 [email protected] Mario Ragwitz Fraunhofer Institute Systems and Innovation Research Breslauer Str. 48, 76139 Karlsruhe tel.: +49(0)721/6809-157 fax: +49(0)721/6809-272 [email protected]
Emiel Hanekamp and Cees J.G. van Halen PricewaterhouseCoopers Archimedeslaan 21 P.O. Box 85096, 3508 AB Utrecht The Netherlands tel. +31 (0)30 - 2191304 fax +31 (0)30 - 2195115 [email protected]
25
European Commission EUR 21346— European research spending for renewable energy sources Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities 2004 — 25 pp. — 21.0 x 29.7 cm ISBN 92-894-8286-9
PROJECT REPORT
EUR 21346
KI-NA-21346-EN-C
This publication aims to give a clear picture of the Research, Technological Development and Demonstration (RTD&D) spending in the field of renewables in Europe. Based on a questionnaire methodology, it provides data on the public and private sectors, on the national and EU spending and on the number of personnel involved in renewable energy RTD&D. This report also highlights issues such as the ratio between renewable research spending and GDP and the correlations between the public and the private spending for each Member State.
European research spending for renewable energy sources
SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT, GLOBAL CHANGE AND ECOSYSTEMS
Interested in European research? RTD info is our quarterly magazine keeping you in touch with main developments (results, programmes, events, etc.). It is available in English, French and German. A free sample copy or free subscription can be obtained from: European Commission Directorate-General for Research Information and Communication Unit B-1049 Brussels Fax (32-2) 29-58220 E-mail: [email protected] Internet: http://europa.eu.int/comm/research/rtdinfo/index_en.html
SALES AND SUBSCRIPTIONS Publications for sale produced by the Office for Official Publications of the European Communities are available from our sales agents throughout the world. How do I set about obtaining a publication? Once you have obtained the list of sales agents, contact the sales agent of your choice and place your order. How do I obtain the list of sales agents? • •
EUROPEAN COMMISSION Directorate-General for Research Directorate J — Energy Unit J.3 — New and renewable energy sources Contact: Domenico Rossetti di Valdalbero European Commission Office CDMA 5/142 B-1049 Brussels Tel. (32-2) 29-62811 Fax (32-2) 29-94991 E-mail: [email protected]
Go to the Publications Office website http://publications.eu.int/ Or apply for a paper copy by fax (352) 2929 42758
EUROPEAN COMMISSION
European research spending for renewable energy sources
2004
Directorate-General for Research Sustainable Energy Systems
EUR 21346
Europe Direct is a service to help you find answers to your questions about the European Union Freephone number:
00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11 LEGAL NOTICE: Neither the European Commission nor any person acting on behalf of the Commission is responsible for the use which might be made of the following information. The views expressed in this publication are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the European Commission. A great deal of additional information on the European Union is available on the Internet. It can be accessed through the Europa server (http://europa.eu.int). Cataloguing data can be found at the end of this publication. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, 2004 ISBN 92-894-8286-9 © European Communities, 2004 Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged. Printed in Luxembourg PRINTED
ON WHITE CHLORINE-FREE PAPER
TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................5 BACKGROUND .............................................................................................................................6 METHODOLOGY ...........................................................................................................................7 DATA COLLECTION .......................................................................................................................9 EVALUATION OF DATA CONSISTENCY ..........................................................................................15 EVIDENCE FROM DATA COLLECTED AND ELABORATION OF PERFORMANCE INDICATORS ................17 Sector specific distribution of RTD&D budget........................................................................19 Correlation between governmental and private spending .......................................................20 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ......................................................................................21 REFERENCES..............................................................................................................................23 WEB SITES .................................................................................................................................24 CONTACT PERSONS ....................................................................................................................25
3
Introduction
Very little information is available on research, technological development and demonstration (RTD&D) spending in the specific field of renewable energy sources (RES) in Europe. There were three objectives of this Specific Support Action funded by the European Union (EU): • to gain a clear picture of the public and private research spending in the field of renewables; • to arrive at an approximate distribution between Member States and EU research spending; • to evaluate each Member State’s share of the research spending in the last decade. The most important results from this study are that: • • •
more than half of the renewable energy research is done by the public sector; one quarter of the public spending comes directly from the EU budget; one third of the EU-15 Government research spending and half of the personnel working on research for renewables are from Germany. Denmark and The Netherlands have the highest ratio of research spending on renewables in comparison to their GDP.
The results of this study may help to define a European research policy in the field of renewables thus contributing to the creation and implementation of the European Research Area. Also, they can be used in developing a better framework for introduction of renewables in the European energy system. This is an important goal of the EU as underlined in the renewable electricity directive 2001/77/EC. Taking into consideration three major objectives of the EU, i.e. ensuring a better security of energy supply, considerably increasing the production of green electricity and reducing greenhouse gas emissions, it seems necessary to increase the efforts dedicated to research spending on renewables both at the national and European levels and to better coordinate and integrate these efforts in Europe. Three research teams were involved in the REDS (Research & Development Spending: a survey of RTD&D spending on renewable energy in the EU countries) project: Arturo Lorenzoni, the Coordinator), Samuele Larzeni, Nicoletta Marigo and Apollonia Miola from Università Commerciale Luigi Bocconi (IEFE) in Italy, Mario Ragwitz from Fraunhofer Institute Systems and Innovation Research (FhG ISI) in Germany and Emiel Hanekamp and Cees Van Halen from PriceWaterhouseCoopers in The Netherlands. The authors were assisted by experts in the different EU Member States.
5
Background Energy RD&D activity in the EU has been the object of two European projects, the JOULESENSER project (Olthof, 1998) and its follow-up the JOULE-PSI (Bruel, 2000), as well as of international studies like the one conducted by the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (Energy Trends, 2002). Although these studies do not focus specifically on renewable energy sources (RES), they were, together with the Eurostat database which also contains useful data, briefly reviewed and their relevance to the REDS project assessed. At present the most important international source for RES RD&D spending is the IEA database on energy RD&D budgets of OECD countries. The primary objective of REDS was to conduct an analytical survey of RD&D expenditure for renewable energy sources (RES) in the EU and the 15 Member States. To reach this goal a comprehensive set of data, spanning from 1993 to 2001, was collected through a questionnaire specifically designed by the project’s partners and completed by national experts for each EU country. The survey’s methodological approach and its content were widely discussed between the core team partners. All the data on RES RD&D expenditure have been collected and stored in a database that is available on the REDS website: www.eu.fraunhofer.de/reds. Some comments on the availability of data both from private and government sources are summarised in Table 1. For many countries part of data, often private funds or funds paid by local governmental bodies, are not monitored and thus could not be included in the database. As a consequence, in spite of the effort made in the project work to enhance the quality of data, the REDS database is still incomplete. Table 1. Considerations about international available data on RTD&D for RES
Government Expenditures
Recent data could only be found in the IEA database. However, attention should be paid to the comments and values given by the REDS experts, since it seems that for some countries, not all IEA data were complete due to the lack of part of the funds given, especially from local governmental institutions. Some international figures on private R&D expenditures were available only from PNNLBattelle project and SENSER. Unfortunately they were very incomplete and cover only few EU countries and years. However, this data was still useful to make a comparison with data collected in REDS. None of the existing databases contains disaggregated figures on the personnel involved in RTD&D.
Private Expenditures
Personnel
Even if data were missing in the previous works, the cited projects and the IEA database were used in REDS for general comparison purposes. The existent literature provided also limited methodological indications upon which the REDS project could ground itself.
6
Methodology The first activity of the project was to set out the methodology for data collection and to establish the guidelines for the questionnaire design. Critical actions consisted in: - setting the boundaries of the study in terms of data to be collected and to be excluded; - specifying the details and the criteria for acquiring the data: the coherence of collected data is crucial when so many sources of information is used; - providing definitions to obtain reliable and comparable statistics. Considering the limited time available (1 year) and the scale of the effort (collecting RD&D expenditures for renewable energy sources for the 15 Member States) it was essential to adopt a pragmatic approach that would allow to collect good quality data and to elaborate a convincing methodology. This consisted in designing a concentric circle framework within which to set the priorities for data collection. Figure 1. REDS boundaries and priorities
Government national RD&D expenditure for RES
Gov. regional RD&D expend. for RES
Other sectors of the economy RD&D expend. for RES
Gov. personnel involved in RD&D for RES
Efficiency expenditure indicators
In the inner circle were located the data that must be gathered to fulfil the project objectives. These pertained to government RD&D expenditure for RES at the national level only. The second and the third outer circles included data (such as government RD&D expenditure at the local level and expenditure made by private companies), that are in general more scattered and difficult to obtain than the previous ones. It was decided that these data should also be collected despite being less critical to achieve the project objectives and probably less accurate and reliable than the ones pertaining to public RD&D expenditure at the national level. The most outer circles contained data (such as personnel involved in RD&D and efficiency expenditure indicators) that could be useful to complete the picture but, if not collected, were not going to undermine the project goals. In order to obtain reliable and comparable data, REDS paid a particular attention to definitions. The OECD Frascati Manual (OECD, 2002) was used as a reference for RD&D and personnel definitions. This choice was undertaken because the methodology indicated by the Manual represents a wellconsolidated praxis and allows for comparison between countries. The definition for the different RES was instead elaborated by taking into account both the one put forth in the Directive
7
2001/77/EC and by the IEA (IEA Energy Statistics, 2004), but also those adopted by the 15 Member States. This approach was necessary, in the presence of multiple definitions, to harmonise all the existent discrepancies that could lead to inconsistency in data collections. To assess the RD&D expenditure for RES in the different member states it was necessary to have a direct insight into the respective national markets. For this reason the project’s team worked together with experts appropriately selected in the different European countries. It was decided to exploit, where possible, personal contacts within academic or other European institutions (Table 2 provides a list of the experts who completed the questionnaire). This was done first of all to exert a greater control on the data to be collected by allowing a continuous exchange of information between the REDS project partners and the experts, but it was also done for practical reasons to optimise the use of limited amount of resources and time. Some recommendations can be derived from REDS in relation to the methodology for RD&D data collection: - a pragmatic approach is crucial when a lot of data should be collected across many different countries and when the time and the financial resources available are limited; - importance of networks for effective results. The choice of exploiting research and scientific contacts to provide the necessary data has proven to be a winning one. - importance of a trial and error approach. The elaboration of a sound and straightforward methodology was the result of a lengthy process that involved all the project partners. This approach proved to be very effective in enhancing clarity and simplicity. Table 2. REDS experts who filled the country questionnaires and corresponding IEA contacts Country Austria
REDS experts Name and email Institute Gerhard Faninger IFF (Institut fur interdisziplinare [email protected] Forschung und Fortbildung)
Belgium
Mario Ragwitz
Denmark
IEA contacts ABARE
FhG-ISI (Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and Innovation Research)
Ministry of Economic Affairs
[email protected] Peter Helby
Lund University
Finland
[email protected] Eija Alakangas
VTT
France
[email protected] Boris Bailly
Service Economie-Prospective
Danish Energy Agency and Ministry of Environment and Energy Energy Department, Ministry of Trade and Industry Ministère de l'économie, des finances et de l'industrie, DGEMP
[email protected] Germany
Mario Ragwitz
FhG-ISI (Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and Innovation Research)
Greece
[email protected] Calliope Panoutsou [email protected]
CRES
Ireland
Therese Murphy
Sustainable Energy Ireland
[email protected] Italy
Samuele Larzeni
IEFE (Istituto di Economia e Politica dell'Energia e dell'Ambiente, [email protected] Università Commerciale L. Bocconi)
8
Federal Ministry of Economics and Technology Ministry of Industry, Energy & Technology International & Sustainable Energy Division, Dpt. of Public Ent. and Sust. Energy Division Ministero delle Attività Produttive
Luxembourg
Emiel Hanekamp [email protected]
HE Environmental & Innovation Consultancy (NL)
Portugal
Alvaro Martins
The Netherlands
[email protected] Esther Schouten [email protected]
CEEETA (Centro de Estudos em Economia da Energia dos Transportese do Ambiente) PricewaterhouseCoopers (NL)
Departimento de Planeamento e Estatistidca, DG Energia Ministry of Economic Affairs
Universidad Pontificia Comillas
Ministerio de Industria y Energia Swedish National Energy Administration Department of Trade and Industry
Spain Sweden United Kingdom
Julio Montes Ponce de Leon [email protected] Peter Helby [email protected] Robert Gross [email protected]
Lund University Imperial College -ICCEPT Department of Environmental S&T
Data collection The project’s core activity was the data collection. This phase resulted to be rather difficult and time consuming, in part for the lack of previous work in this field and in part for the non-availability of some of the data under investigation. Although the International Energy Agency (IEA) RD&D database was used as benchmark, a great care was taken in designing the questionnaire. This was designed to allow for harmonised data collection and to ease the task of transferring and storing the information obtained in an ad hoc created database. Figures that have been considered of interest for the project reflect the priorities previously described in the “concentric circle” approach and include: government expenditures at both the national and the regional level, personnel involved in RD&D for RES and some data useful to calculate efficiency expenditure indicators to analyse the effectiveness of the financial support devoted to RD&D for RES. The structure of financing has also been investigated in order to understand the flows of expenditure and to avoid the double counting of funds redistributed by public institutions to RD&D performers. It was decided to customise the questionnaire for each Country in order to take into account the funds given by local administrations. Figure 2 shows the lay out of the final questionnaire, with comments to guide the respondents. Where official information was not available, experts were asked to give their own estimates on the basis of information available. In order to appreciate the reliability of these figures, a confidence indicator ranging from 0 (absolutely unreliable) to 10 (maximum reliability of data) had to accompany the data. Furthermore it was also asked to integrate the data with comments considered useful by the respondents for a better understanding of the data provided. The confidence indicator and the comments were precious in the following phase of data interpretation. The data collection process was carried out in strict contact with national partners in each EU member state. A brief guideline for approaching the data collection was distributed to the experts and some preliminary sources of information were also suggested. The outcome of the process is a database where data coming from the fifteen competed questionnaires were merged. Its structure mirrors that of the questionnaire: - structure and budget of financing; -
program funding and expenditures;
-
government expenditures (national and regional level);
-
government personnel in full time equivalent and headcount;
-
RD&D expenditures and personnel of other sectors of economy;
-
data for performance indicators.
9
GOV
France
Sector of economy: Administrative level:
Instructions Government NUTS 2 It considers the SUM OF To know what the LEVEL NUTS 2 expenditures at the LEVEL corresponds in your Country click on the NUTS 2 of the Government Sector, button here below: that is what the entities in level NUTS 2 spend, all together, for the Levels NUTS technologies listed below.
2001
2000
1999
1998
need to know nice to know
1997
1996
1995
1994
1993
% budget Budget assigned by this administrative level to R&D for RES compared with the total spending in Government Sector (all the levels national and NUTS 2). This percentage will give how much the level NUTS 2 weights on the governmental financing.
10
RD&D expenditures for RES Millions, National Currencies Total R&D expenditures for RES of entities of level NUTS 2 Biomass Geothermal Hydro Biogas, Landfill and sewage gas Solar Photovoltaics Solar thermal Other Solar Tide energy Wave energy Wind Other
Figure 2 Example of questionnaire (France) - part of the sheet "Government Expenditures Regions (Lorraine, etc.)"; comments are not shown.
1992
The data available in the database are in national currency but conversions in Euro 2002 are also provided. The milestones for the data collection can be summarised as follows: - implementation of clear questionnaires; -
personal contacts in each country;
-
close collaboration and assistance to national collaborators;
-
continue verification of the process.
Some data from the REDS database are provided in the tables below.
Table 3. Government Expenditures for RTD&D for RES (Million Euro 2002)
Country
2001
2000
1999
1998
1997
1996
1995
1994
1993
8.0
6.7
9.7
10.3
7.9
6.5
-
-
-
BE - Belgium DE - Germany
12.4 113.8
6.6 130.8
3.1 144.5
1.0 158.2
2.2 146.7
2.0 158.4
4.5 130.8
3.7 -
3.4 -
DK - Denmark EL - Greece ES - Spain FI - Finland FR - France IE - Ireland IT - Italy LU - Luxembourg NL - The Netherlands PT - Portugal SE - Sweden UK - United Kingdom
25.9 2.6 25.4 13.1 18.3 0.3 25.8 0.3 51.9 0.9 25.1 32.5
2.0 18.4 13.5 13.5 0.8 30.0 41.4 0.8 24.6 21.4
2.2 17.0 13.0 26.1 44.5 1.4 29.3 -
2.5 22.0 4.0 34.3 42.9 1.3 24.6 -
3.3 16.0 3.0 36.8 38.9 0.6 -
3.3 4.8 39.9 29.4 1.2 -
6.0 5.1 42.6 24.5 0.6 -
3.4 5.2 31.3 0.6 -
3.0 5.5 27.7 1.6 -
AT - Austria
11
Table 4. Personnel working on RTD&D for RES in the Government Sector in 2001, expressed in Full Time Equivalent (FTE) and Headcount (i.e. including persons only partly working on renewables).
The personnel are disaggregated per Energy Source, occupation and qualification. The selected countries have a significant quantity of data collected on this matter. FTE Energy source Total RTD&D personnel for RES in the Government Sector Biomass Geothermal Hydro Biogas, landfill and sewage gas Solar Photovoltaics Solar thermal
Headcount
AT DE DK ES
IT
IT
UK
114 869 196 178 164 114 1217 214 233 164 35 92 59 30 45 35 129 40 195 45 5 75 0 -0 5 105 -0 0 15 8 0 -0 15 11 -5 0
438 93 0 3
5 -15 30
0 6 -0 410 53 133 116 460 19 35 50 26 34 90 60
AT DE
ES
FI
5 -15 30
0 -574 154 644 44 36 100
0 10 ---
0 116 50 60
22 173 170 3
Other Solar Tide energy
3 0
9 0
0 0
8 --
6 0
3 0
13 0
10 --
-0
6 0
0 6
Wave energy Wind
0 4
0 55
0 18
-15
0 3
0 4
0 77
-20
0 23
0 3
17 60
Other RES
2
145 41
--
0
2
203
--
--
0
64
Occupation Researchers
100 652
--
92
97
100 913 109
--
97
--
Technicians and equivalent Other support staff
14 --
152 65
---
71 15
40 26
14 --
213 91
85 20
---
40 26
---
80
--
--
31
0
14
--
15
--
10
--
0
--
--
32
0
80
--.
35
--
--
--
0
--
--
15
63
--
--
44
--
--
--
0
--
--
0
0
--
--
25
--
63
--
20 14
---
---
90 10
91 10
-20
---.
0 95
---
-91
---
Qualification University degrees at PhD level Other post-secondary non tertiary diplomas Diplomas of secondary education Other tertiary level diplomas Basic university degrees below the PhD level Other qualifications
12
Table 5. Expenditures and personnel involved in RTD&D for RES in the Other sectors of economy
(Business enterprise, Higher Education and Private non-profit sectors) in 2001. The selected countries have a significant quantity of data collected on this matter. AT FI FR DE IT LU PT ES NL Private Expenditures (Meuro 2002) Business enterprise Higher Education Private non-profit Total
3.1 38.5 34.6 142.3 7.5 ---- 27.4 -1.5 -- 0.0 0.0 -4.6 38.5 34.6 182.9 7.5
0.3 --0.3
0.3 0.4 0.4 1.1
Personnel (Headcount) Business enterprise Higher Education Private non-profit Total Headcount
30 -15 45
-----
-----
500 770 0 1270
-0 ---
-----
23 10 0 33
-----
Business enterprise Higher Education
30 --
---
---
357 34.5 550 --
-0
---
---
---
Private non-profit
15
--
--
--
--
--
--
Total FTE
45
--
--
--
--
--
--
47 --47
4.7 60.9 0.3 -0.0 -5.1 65,7
Personnel (FTE)
0
--
907 34.5
Table 6. Total expenditures per EU Country on RTD&D for RES in 2001 (Million Euro 2002)
Countries
Government Sector
Other Sectors
Total Expenditure
AT
7.9
4.6
12.5
BE
12.1
n.a.
12.1
DE
111.9
182.9
294.8
DK
24.0
n.a.
24.0
EL
2.5
n.a.
2.5
ES
24.6
5.1
29.7
FI
13.1
38.5
51.6
FR
18.0
34.6
52.6
IE
0.3
n.a.
0.3
IT
25.2
7.5
32.7
LU
0.3
0
0.3
NL
50.0
65.7
115.7
PT
0.9
1.1
2.0
SE
30.1
n.a.
30.1
UK
28.3
n.a.
28.3
349.3
340.0
689.3
Total EU countries
13
An important outcome of REDS was to find out there are not complete international data on private expenditures, nor even on the personnel involved in RD&D in the renewable energy sector. The REDS database on RD&D expenditures for RES results to be comparable with the IEA one, further improving and completing the data it contains. The main difference, apart from the recovery of some missing data, consists in the inclusion of local government funds and private expenditures, which are not included in the IEA database nor in other previous studies. From the aggregation of IEA and REDS databases, a complete snapshot of the expenditure for RD&D for the renewable energy sector in the Government Sector can be obtained, as shown in Table 7. The relation between the definition of technologies is shown in Table 8. Table 7. Government Expenditures for RTD&D for RES (Million Euros 2002).
Country
2001
2000
1999
1998
1997
1996
1995
1994
1993
AT BE DE DK EL
8.0 12.4 113.8 25.9 2.6
6.7 6.6 130.8 16.9 2.0
9.6 3.1 144.5 16.9 2.2
10.3 1.0 158.2 19.7 2.5
7.8 2.2 146.7 17.9 3.3
6.5 2.0 158.4 13.9 3.3
8.4 4.5 130.8 17.3 6.0
7.2 3.7 84.9 18.5 3.4
5.6 3.4 128.5 21.3 3.0
ES FI
25.5 13.3
18.6 13.7
17.1 9.6
22.3 8.7
16.4 12.0
15.5 7.4
15.4 5.9
15.7 5.7
22.1 6.0
FR IE
18.3 0.3
13.5 0.8
13.0 --
4.0 --
2.9 --
4.8 --
5.1 --
5.2 --
5.5 --
IT LU
25.8 0.3
30.0 0.0
26.1 0.0
34.3 0.0
36.8 0.0
39.9 0.0
42.6 0.0
31.3 0.0
27.7 0.0
NL PT
51.1 0.9
39.5 0.8
41.2 1.4
39.3 1.3
35.4 0.6
26.7 1.2
22.3 0.5
25.1 0.6
20.1 1.4
SE UK Total
25.3 25.3 32.5 21.4 356.1 326.8
30.9 26.5 7.9 5.7 323.5 333.8
8.8 8.6 13.8 18.2 15.2 7.7 11.4 17.5 17.9 30.2 298.6 299.7 290.1 237.3 290.0
Sources: REDS (black values) and IEA (blue values) databases.
Table 8. Relations between IEA and REDS RES technology definitions
REDS Total Biomass Hydro Biogas, landfill and sewage gas Solar Photovoltaics Solar thermal Other solar Tide energy Wave energy Wind
IEA Total renewable energy Biomass Total hydro Biomass Total solar Solar photo-electric Solar thermal-electric Solar heating & cooling Ocean Ocean Wind
14
Evaluation of data consistency The completeness of the data collected was checked in the evaluation phase and a cross-national comparison was implemented. The quality of colleted data was evaluated with reference to the quantity, quality and validity, as shown in Table 7. The main conclusion of the evaluation process was that the consistency of the gathered data is sufficient for a survey of EU spending on RTD&D in the field of RES, but it could be improved and kept updated under a new project. The area where most difficulties were met in finding reliable information is the structure of financing. REDS effort in reconstructing the flows of funds from the sources to the research performers did not supply a clear picture because in many countries the channels of financing are quite diverse and dispersed. The role of private financers did not result to be clear in many countries.
Table 7. Overall REDS assessment per country
Country
Validity
Quality
Quantity
Austria
Good
Good
Good
Belgium
Sufficient
Moderate
Moderate
Denmark
Sufficient
Moderate
Sufficient
Finland
Sufficient
Good
Good
France
Sufficient
Moderate
Moderate
Germany
Good
Good
Good
Greece
Poor
Poor
Poor
Ireland
Sufficient
Sufficient
Moderate
Italy
Good
Sufficient
Good
Luxembourg
Sufficient
Moderate
Poor
Portugal
Sufficient
Sufficient
Sufficient
Spain
Moderate
Sufficient
Good
Sweden
Sufficient
Moderate
Sufficient
Netherlands
Good
Good
Sufficient
UK
Sufficient
Good
Good
Source: REDS project. Good
:
data requirements are exceeded
Sufficient
:
complies with data requirements
Moderate
:
attention has been paid to data but not sufficient
Poor
:
not available or totally not in compliance with requirements
This overall evaluation is based on the following conclusions: -
Country data are sufficient considering time and budget constraints;
-
Availability and reliability of ‘Government expenditures for 2000 and 2001 per RES’ varied from country to country;
-
Six countries provided a variety of good quality data, the rest was less successful;
-
In the overall assessment per country, 11 countries have two out of three criteria sufficient or good;
15
-
Comparison of ‘Government expenditures’ and ‘Elaboration of performance indicators’ is possible for most countries;
-
Collected data are sufficient for project goals, as Table 8 on cross country comparison underlines.
Table 8. Cross country evaluation
Country
Availability
Comparability
Austria
Sufficient Good
Good
Belgium Denmark
Moderate Moderate
Finland
Moderate Good
France
Sufficient
Moderate
Germany
Sufficient
Good
Greece
Moderate
Poor
Ireland
Moderate
Sufficient
Italy
Sufficient
Sufficient
Luxembourg
Moderate
Moderate
Portugal
Moderate
Sufficient
Spain
Sufficient
Moderate
Sweden
Moderate
Netherlands
Sufficient Sufficient
UK
Sufficient
Sufficient
Good
Good
Source: REDS project. Good Sufficient Moderate Poor
: : : :
no restrictions for cross country comparison cross country comparison can be performed, some comments needed specific comments needed with results of cross country comparison totally insufficient for cross country comparison
The proposed methodology for data collection has proven to be adequate and workable, even if about half of the countries still need to organise the collection and management of RES RTD&D expenditures. As a result the data currently available are rather poor for some countries. Moreover, different gathering methodologies influenced the quality of the data collected. Table 9 shows the reliability of collected data with reference to the Government expenditures for 2000 and 2001.
16
Table 9. Availability and reliability of most important data (Government expenditures for 2000 and
2001 per RES) per country
Country Austria Belgium Denmark Finland France Germany Greece Ireland Italy Luxembourg Portugal Spain Sweden The Netherlands UK Source: REDS project.
Availability of ‘Government expenditures’ for 2000 and 2001 per RES Available Available Partially available Available Available Available Partially available Partially available Available Partially available Partially available Available Available Available Available
Reliability coefficient* 10 5 4,5 8 9,9 9,1 6 7,8 9 3 no data 9 4,3 8 7
* The average of all reliability coefficients is taken.
Available
=
all data (on RES) is available;
Partially available
=
data is only partially available;
Not available
=
data is not available;
=
data is unreliable (reliability coefficient is < 6 or no data is provided)
Evidence from data collected and elaboration of performance indicators The crude data sometimes are hard to read. For this reason an elaboration of performance indicators for RTD&D spending for renewable energy in the EU countries has been performed on the basis of the collected data, to highlight the commitment of the EU member countries and the success factors in this field. Measuring RTD&D performance poses many problems. This can be related to the nature of the RTD&D activity which is a highly uncertain and lengthy process. Furthermore, being RTD&D only one of the components of much more complex innovation systems it is difficult to establish a direct relation between RTD&D spending and any output. Different indicators can be used to express the RTD&D intensity as well as the RTD&D performance of a country in the sector of renewable energy sources. A number of such indicators, which are rigorously defined in the report, have been evaluated within the REDS project. The project concentrated on the following performance indicators: -
RTD&D intensity, defined as §
incidence of RES RTD&D expenditure of Gross Domestic Product (GDP),
§
ratio of RES RTD&D expenditure and total governmental budget,
17
§
RES RTD&D expenditure per capita,
§
ratio of RES RTD&D expenditure and general RTD&D budget for energy,
§
ratio of RES RTD&D expenditure and total national RTD&D budget;
-
correlation between governmental and private spending;
-
RES RTD&D expenditure per human resources involved in RES RTD&D;
-
RES RTD&D expenditure and number of patents in a specific technological sector.
Figure 3 shows the RTD&D intensity and RES RTD&D intensity. For many countries the RES
RTD&D intensity correlates to the countries’ RTD&D intensity. Only in France and Ireland RES RTD&D intensity seems to be at a lower level. RES RTD&D intensity in Denmark and The Netherlands is the highest of the EU countries.
RD&D expenditure/GDP
4,00%
0,020% 0,018% 0,016% 0,014% 0,012% 0,010% 0,008%
3,50% 3,00% 2,50% 2,00% 1,50%
0,006% 0,004% 0,002% 0,000%
1,00% 0,50%
5 -1 EU
Ita ly bu N et he rg rla nd Po s rtu ga l Sp ai U Sw n ni te ed d en Ki ng do m m
Lu
xe
nd
Ire
la
e
y
ec
an
re G
ce
m er
G
Fr
an
d
k
an
Fi
nl
ar
m
m
iu
en D
lg
Be
Au
st
ria
0,00%
RES RD&D expenditure/GDP
Figure 3. RTD&D intensity (%) and RES RTD&D intensity (%), 2000
RD&D expenditure/GDP (%) RES RD&D expense/GDP (%)
Comparing the ratio of RTD&D expenditures for RES and the total governmental budget of the EU15 countries shows similar differences. Between 1996 and 2001, some Member States spent about 0.02% of their total national budget annually (which is the sum of the budgets of the government level and the regional administration level) while other countries spent 0.01% or less. Denmark, Finland, the Netherlands and Sweden have a leading position in this respect.
Figure 4 shows the relationship between RTD&D budget for RES and RTD&D budget for the
overall energy sector. Excluding France, Ireland and Italy where the RES RTD&D seems to be underrepresented, the expenses for RES increase proportional to the counties budgets for energy research. In Italy, the low share of RES RTD&D with regard to energy RTD&D is somewhat compensated by the fact that the energy sector is the main part of all RTD&D activities, as the ratio of the budget of RTD&D for RES to the total RTD&D budget is in the European average with slightly more than 0.2%. On the other hand, this ratio in France is again the lowest with a value below 0.06%. In Denmark and the Netherlands, the expenses of RTD&D for RES have the largest share of all EU countries with about 0.7% of the total expenses for RTD&D.
18
0,80% 0,70% 0,60% 0,50% 0,40% 0,30% 0,20% 0,10% 0,00%
budget R&D RES / budget R&D
100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0%
Au Be stria D lgiu en m m Fi ark nl a Fr nd a G nc er e m G any re e Ire ce la n N et I d he ta rl ly Po and rtu s g Sp al U ni S a te w in d ed Ki e ng n do m
budget R&D RES / budget R&D energy sector
Figure 4. Ratio of the public budget for RTD&D of RES to the RTD&D budget for the energy sector (blue) and ratio of the public budget for RTD&D of RES to the total RTD&D budget (red)
Country
Sector specific distribution of RTD&D budget
Another important factor arising from the project is that the main focus for funding the RTD&D of renewable energies is put on different sectors depending on the country. In 2001, Germany, France, Italy, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom mainly funded RTD&D in the field of photovoltaic technology, using from 35 % (NL, UK) up to 65 % (IT for all solar technologies) of their total RES RTD&D budget. Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Portugal, Sweden and Finland are putting the greatest emphasis on the RTD&D of biomass, using 30 – 80 % of their RTD&D budgets for this purpose. In Spain, the RTD&D of wind energy is receiving the largest share of the governmental research and development budget amounting to about 35 %. In Spain, Denmark and the Netherlands the budgets seem to be split more equally between the different sectors than in the other countries. The differences between the EU-15 countries can not only be explained with regional differences like the availability of the different renewable energy sources. In fact, it seems to be influenced by many different factors, such as the general industrial and technological structure of a country. In Figure 5 the number of employees and the number of patents (in 2001) is shown as a function of the governmental funding in 2001. Generally no strong correlation between the patent data and RTD&D expenditures can be found although a linear increase of patent output with RTD&D input is suggested. The number of researchers on the other hand could only be gathered with a low degree of reliability in the REDS project. Therefore for the few countries where data on human resources in the sector of PV technology were available a large statistical spread of this data is observed. In this respect Figure 5 illustrates the difficulties encountered in the REDS project, when statistical correlations between RTD&D input and output have been calculated. This explains the fact that most of the indicators calculated in the project focus on RTD&D input rather than on the corresponding output.
19
Figure 5. Human resources and number of patents (right axis) in the photovoltaic sector as a function of the yearly funding of RTD&D of photovoltaics in 2001 by EU countries’ governments
16 DE 14
Number of patents
12 10 8 6
FR UK
4 IT
NL
2 0 0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
R&D input [mill. euro]
Correlation between governmental and private spending
With reference to the correlation between governmental and private spending data Figure 6 shows that a positive correlation is found. Public budgets that are made available for RES RTD&D seem to attract private investment in RTD&D as well. In general, by funding RTD&D projects for RES, the government seems to activate at least the same amount from private sources. Still the figure shows that some countries are more successful in creating a leverage effect to the private market than others. The 2000 data do not differ much from the 2001 data. Generally it has to be emphasised that the data on private expenditures could only be collected with relatively large uncertainty and are expected to be underestimated.
20
Figure 6. Statistical correlation of the governmental and non governmental expenditures for RTD&D of renewable energies
200
non governmental expenditures [€]
DE 180 160 2001
140
2000
120 100 80 60
NL
40
FR
20
ESP
0 0.0
20.0
40.0 60.0 80.0 100.0 governmental expenditures [€]
120.0
140.0
Conclusion and recommendations The database created under REDS project is rather unique in Europe, being focused on RTD&D on renewable energy and, even if it is still incomplete, represents a valuable tool for designing and evaluating national policies and to compare the commitment of the European Member States in the development of renewable energy. An essential step for the success of the project is thus the dissemination of its results and this booklet is aimed to improve the understanding of the policies of the European Member States for research in the field of RES. A comparison of the efforts made and of the output obtained can help the decision makers in making informed choices by being aware of what other countries are doing. The partners of the REDS project are also available to participate to seminars or workshops to discuss the results and possible follow up of the work done. Their contacts can be found at the end of this publication. A final recommendation is related to the EU financing for research activity: a process of improvement of the data collection from international organisations should start, in order to facilitate the interpretation of trends for policy implementation. The inclusion of specific codes for financed research projects (at EU as well as national level) could enhance the knowledge about the financed activities. As a final summary, Figure 7 gives an overall qualitative view of the spending for RES RTD&D in Europe (EU-15), from national and European sources, separating the public and private spending, the national (15 member States) and the EU spending (one fourth of the EU Fifth RTD Framework Programme – 1998-2002).
21
Figure 7. The overall financing of RTD&D for RES in Europe in 2001 (EU and European Member States – Government and Private sector)
800 700 600
Meuro
500 400
Private Sector
300
Government Sector
200 100 0 Total MS
European Union
22
References Bruel, R., Greisberger, H., Indinger, A., van Wees, M., de Laat, B., Clément, D., Linares, P. and Montes, J., 2000, Priority Setting Initiative (PSI), Joule III project, available at http://www.eva.wsr.ac.at/projekte/psi.htm. The project database is available at: http://www.otri.upco.es/psi.htm. Eurec Agency, 2002, In the future for renewable energy – Prospects and directions. The Cromwell Press. EU Directive 2001/77 on the promotion of electricity produced from renewable energy sources in the internal electricity market, OJEC L 283 (27/10/2001). European Commission (1997), Energy for the Future: Renewable Sources of Energy White Paper for a Community Strategy and Action Plan, COM(97)599 final (26/11/97). European Commission (2002), Inventory of public aid granted to different energy sources, Commission staff working paper. Eurostat (2002), Energy and Renewable statistics, Luxembourg. G8 Renewable Energy Taskforce, 2001. Taskforce on Renewable Energy, July. Guy, K, 1998, Strategic Options for the Evaluation of the R&D Programmes of the European Union, http://www.technopolis.co.uk/reports/stoa/title.htm . IEA, statistics and data on RTD&D, OECD, Paris. Lenz, S, 2000, Support of Renewable Energies in different countries, Bremer energie institut, wwwuser.uni-bremen.de/~bei/download/re_support.pdf . Observ’ER (Observatoire des énergies renouvelables), (2003), Energie Renouvelables en Europe : les chiffres clefs, Observatoire des énergies renouvelables. OECD, 2002, Frascati Manual 2002: Proposed Standard Practice for Surveys on Research and Development and Main Science and Technology Indicators, Paris. Olthof R., De Laat B., Clément D., Virdis, M., Smith A., 1998, Synergies between European and National Strategies for Energy RTD, SENSER, Joule III project. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory. pnl.gov/index.htm.
Battelle Memorial Institute, http://energytrends.
World Energy Council, 2001, Energy Technologies for the Twenty-First Century, London.
23
Web sites
http://www.cordis.lu/eesd/src/indicators.htm http://www.jrc.es/cfapp/eneriure/analysis.htm http://www.iea.org/public/studies/curves.htm http://www.etde.org/etdeweb/ µhttp://www.solarpaces.org/legislation.htm http://www.enr-network.org/index2.lw http://www.worldenergy.org/wec-geis/publications/default/launches/et21/et21.asp http://www.otri.upco.es/Psi.htm http://www.eu.fraunhofer.de/reds http://www.iefe.unibocconi.it
24
Contact persons
Domenico Rossetti di Valdalbero and Barry Robertson European Commission, DG Research New and Renewables Energy Sources Unit Rue de la Loi 200, Brussels, B-1049 tel: + 32 2 2950633 fax: + 32 2 2994991 [email protected] Domenico.Rossetti-di-Valdalberoec.eu.int Arturo Lorenzoni IEFE, Università Commerciale Luigi Bocconi viale Filippetti 9, 20122 Milano tel: +39 02 5836 3820 fax: +39 02 5836 3890 [email protected] Mario Ragwitz Fraunhofer Institute Systems and Innovation Research Breslauer Str. 48, 76139 Karlsruhe tel.: +49(0)721/6809-157 fax: +49(0)721/6809-272 [email protected]
Emiel Hanekamp and Cees J.G. van Halen PricewaterhouseCoopers Archimedeslaan 21 P.O. Box 85096, 3508 AB Utrecht The Netherlands tel. +31 (0)30 - 2191304 fax +31 (0)30 - 2195115 [email protected]
25
European Commission EUR 21346— European research spending for renewable energy sources Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities 2004 — 25 pp. — 21.0 x 29.7 cm ISBN 92-894-8286-9
