Dies ist eine HTML Version eines Anhanges der Informationsfreiheitsanfrage 'Consultation 2008 - 2009 TEN-E'.




     

FIEC Contribution to the European Commission consultation on energy 
networks

FIEC is the European Construction Industry Federation, representing via its 33 
national Member Federations in 28 countries (26 EU & EFTA, Croatia and Turkey) 
construction enterprises of all sizes, i.e. small and medium-sized enterprises as well 
as “global players”, carrying out all forms of building and civil engineering activities. 

FIEC welcomes the European Commission’s Second Strategic Energy Review 
presented on 13 November 2008. This Review tackles the EU energy 
challenges of security of supply, competitiveness, and climate change, and 
puts forwards many solutions of interest. 
FIEC supports the Commission in its emphasis on EU needs in energy 
infrastructure and networks, underlined by the Green Paper “Towards secure, 
sustainable and competitive European energy networks”, and demonstrated 
throughout the analyses of the issues affecting different sources of energy 
(nuclear, off-shore wind, oil and gas, etc.). As the International Energy Agency 
estimates, investment needs in energy output, transport and distribution by 
2030 amount to €1.8 trillion according to a reference scenario. 
FIEC would like to underscore that energy networks are not only a subject of 
long-term issues. The gas crisis many EU countries were confronted with this 
winter, as well as repeated disruptions in national electrical grids, highlighted 
the urgent need to develop and adapt our energy infrastructure and networks. 
Adapting the grid to short and long term challenges is a considerable and 
complex task, but it has the potential of making a noteworthy contribution to 
job creation in the EU. For these reasons, FIEC encourages the EU to develop 
an ambitious policy for energy networks that would be able to meet these 
challenges. 
(1) 
What do you consider to be the main barriers to the development of a 
European grid and gas network? How far can they be addressed at 
national/regional level, and when should the EU act? 

Lack of network planning. Could be improved through a European 
timetable provided for by new ENTSOs for gas and electricity. Besides, 
a strong timetable setting achievement deadlines is necessary at EU 
level for strategic projects. ENTSO and EU timetables should be 
included in national, EIB and ERDB plans. 



Slow authorisation process. Need to reduce time taken for 
authorisation of cross-border projects.
Lack of optimal project coordination in case of cross-border 
projects. Need for strengthened role of project coordinator and more 
systematic resort to single project managers. 
Lack of sufficient European co-financing thus failing to provide an 
incentive.
Need to improve European political support for projects. The 
matter should take a higher profile in EU decision making. 
Lack of national responsibility in meeting project deadlines. 
Risks in implementation phase. The European Investment Bank may 
have a role to play in providing bank guarantees.
(2) 
What circumstances justify an EU intervention in local planning disputes 
related to energy infrastructure? In those circumstances, what should 
the EU do?
May be justified in some cases: 
-  When the project is blocked in the authorisation phase; 
-  When project specifications resulting from the consultation phase 
make it technically or financially unfeasible, or substantially 
weaken its cost-benefit balance. 
In such cases the Commission should first seek arbitration through a 
nominated coordinator and failing that adopt a formal recommendation. 
(3)  Is a more focussed and structured approach to research and 
demonstration relating to European networks needed? How should it 
look?
Research needs to focus on the consideration of environmental constraints on 
projects such as those related to the laying of underground cables and the 
management of waste. 
(4) 
What do you think is the most important activity for the EU in network 
development? 
The provision of sufficient financial resources. 



(5) 
Should the EU be more involved in facilitating infrastructure projects in 
third countries? If so, in what way?
Yes 
Through external policy instruments such as European Neighbourhood Policy 
and development aid money from the EIB and EBRD.
TEN-E
(6) 
What sort of support should the EU provide to developers of new energy 
networks to have the greatest impact, considering that resources are 
limited? Is the approach of TEN-E still relevant? How can the EU help 
improve the conditions for investment?

Increase the TEN-E budget and political priority given to it as factor in 
European energy security. 
Encourage the speeding up of consultation and authorisation 
procedures for permits, or consider single simplified procedure in the 
case of cross-border projects. 
Coordinator of project, intergovernmental commissions, and 
single project managers could be nominated to overcome difficulties 
and bottlenecks in procedure for cross-border projects. 
(7) 
In view of the proposed revision to the TEN-E guidelines, how can the EU 
improve the focus, effectiveness and impact of the TEN-E policy within 
its existing budget? 
The budget is insufficient but giving the TEN-E a higher political profile and 
placing more pressure on Member States to work to remove unnecessary 
delays due to red-tape would be a start. 
(8)  Should TEN-E be extended to oil infrastructure? Should it also be 
extended to new networks for CO2, biogas or other networks?
Funding through the TEN-E should be concentrated on infrastructure which 
will create an economy of scale and that will help bring about increased 
energy security for the EU.
Strategic local projects (biogas networks, networks for reducing CO2, urban 
heating and cooling networks) should benefit from EU co-financing mainly 
through structural funds and research programmes. 



(9) 
Do you have views on, or suggestions for new priority projects which the 
EU should give backing to? 
The following three approaches should be borne in mind in designating priority 
projects:
x An approach focused on interconnections between national 
networks, with the aim of creating a reliable and competitive energy 
market
x  The regional supply security approach, and sharing of resources 
between Member States, 
x  The energy and climate issues approach. 
Priority projects should include:
-
Development of transportation capacity. 
-
Adaptation of electrical supply networks to “smart grid” technology to 
avoid blackouts and anticipate peak use. Adaptation of the grid to the 
supply of renewable energy is also needed. 
-
Diversification of gas supply through the development of LNG capacities. 
The selection of priority projects should rely on a credible cost-benefit analysis 
and should target realistic projects. Besides, the list of priority projects 
should include an appropriate geographical spread in those projects 
financed
.
(10)  Would it help TEN-E/EU to gain more impact and visibility if it was turned 
into an operational security of supply and solidarity instrument?
Yes 
Energy security is paramount in any change of focus for the TEN-E. 
(11)  What additional EU measures beyond those mentioned in this Green 
Paper would help secure a sustainable infrastructure for the EU? 
It is important for the EU to speak with one voice in dealing with third countries 
on questions of energy. This is crucial for Europe’s future energy supply.
Exchange of best practice as regards sustainable network development from 
network companies and stakeholders. The ENTSOs should spearhead this 
work.