Non-Nuclear Energy Research
in Europe
–
A comparative study
C o m m u n i t y re s e a rc h
E U R O P E A N
COMMISSION
ST
U
D
Y
Volume 2
Country Reports A – I
15
KI-NB-21614-EN-N
EUR 21614/2
Non-Nuclear Ener
gy Resear
ch
in Eur
ope
– A comparative study V
olume 2 – Country Reports A – I
Building a European Research Area for Non-Nuclear Energy calls for co-operation
among EU Member States, Associated States and the EU going beyond the mere EU
Framework Programmes. But this requires a detailed knowledge of European energy
research. This report describes, compares and analyses the energy RTD systems of 33
European countries, looks at existing multilateral co-operation schemes and provides
a synthetic picture of actors, structures, priorities and priority-setting processes.
EUR 21614/2
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: research@cec.eu.int
Internet: http://europa.eu.int/comm/research/rtdinfo/index_en.html
EUROPEAN COMMISSION
Directorate-General for Research
Directorate J-Energy
Unit 1 - Policy and strategy
Helpdesk: rtd-ernergy@cec.eu.int
Internet: http://europa.eu.int/comm/research/energy/index_en.htm/
SALES AND SUBSCRIPTIONS
Publications for sale produced by the Offi ce for Offi cial 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?
• Go to the Publications Offi ce website http://publications.eu.int/
• Or apply for a paper copy by fax (352) 2929 42758
Non-Nuclear Energy Research
in Europe – A comparative study
Country Reports A – I
EUROPEAN COMMISSION
Directorate-General for Research
2005
Sustainable Energy Systems
EUR 21614/2
Austria
Belgium
Bulgaria
Cyprus
Czech Republic
Denmark
Estonia
Finland
France
Germany
Greece
Hungary
Iceland
Ireland
Israel
Italy
iii
Table of contents
Country study Austria
1
Country study Belgium
19
Country study Bulgaria
43
Country study Cyprus
57
Country study Czech Republic
71
Country study Denmark
91
Country study Estonia
107
Country study Finland
127
Country study France
145
Country study Germany
181
Country study Greece
209
Country study Hungary
227
Country study Iceland
247
Country study Ireland
267
Country study Israel
295
Country study Italy
321
iv
Austria
1
Country study Austria
Austria
3
Contents:
1
Summary of country study indicating main points for synergy
5
2
National RTDI system
5
2.1
Policy formulation and organisational setting
5
2.1.1
Priority setting
6
2.1.2
Role of Regions
7
2.2
Public funding of NNE RTD
8
3
Internationalisation of NNE RTD from an Austrian perspective
11
3.1
Participation in EU FP programmes
12
4
Main points for collaboration, synergy, complementarity with regard to the
NNE RTD ERA
14
5
Sources/References
14
6
Annex
15
Austria
5
1
Summary of country study indicating main points for
synergy
Descriptions of the Austrian RTD policy often refer the Austrian paradox: good
economic performance accompanied by relatively low R&D-spending. Economic
structure (relatively weak position in R&D-intensive sectors) and low propensity of
industry to invest in R&D seem to be the two major reasons for Austria legging
behind in its R&D investments.
Against this background Austria has increased its activities to catch up with the first
league of European RTD performers. This is reflected both by the steady increase of
public spending on R&D in the last decade and by the implementation of new funding
instruments aimed at building up critical mass in specific thematic areas. Most
outstanding in this respect was the launch of the competence centres programmes
1
that specifically address science-industry linkages.
NNE RTD policy as one specific RTD policy field has not remained unaffected by the
overall developments. The following chapter outlines some basic features of the
Austrian NNE RTD policy and highlights the most important policy innovations with
respect to funding instruments and organisational changes.
2
National RTDI system
NNE RTD policy as one specific RTD policy field has not remained unaffected by the
overall developments. The following chapter outlines some basic features of the
Austrian NNE RTD policy and highlights the most important policy innovations with
respect to funding instruments and organisational changes.
2.1
Policy formulation and organisational setting
On the federal level the ministry for transport, innovation and technology (BMVIT) is
responsible for NNE RTD. At the same time the agenda for energy policy lies with
the ministry for economic affairs and labour (BMWA). The third relevant player on
the federal policy level is the ministry
of agriculture, forestry, environment and water
management (BMLFUW).
Being the core actor in formulating and implementing NNE RTD policy BMVIT
fulfils delivers several functions:
•
Strategy setting: In its white book on energy research and technology (published
June 2002) BMVIT set out the major lines for orientation for future activities in
enhancing Austria’s energy research performance.
•
Programme design: In the last years technology programmes as a new way of
channelling public research funds have become an important funding instrument
in NNE RTD. With the programme on Technologies for Sustainable Development
on the one hand and Kplus on the other, BMVIT has been the pioneer in setting
1
Three different competence centre programmes are in place: K
plus
(BMVIT, managed by TIG),
Kind (BMWA, managed by FFF), Knet (BMWA, managed by FFF).
Austria
6
up focused programmes for energy research. This resembles a radical innovation
in the Austrian funding system as bottom-up project funding was the predominant
funding instrument before the start of the new programme in the year 2001.
•
Internationalisation: BMVIT has been playing an important role in enhancing the
integration of the Austrian energy research community in the European area. In
this context the membership in IEA has proved to be an important and helpful
entry gate. Austria’s accession to the EU was obviously the next most important
step in fostering internationalisation of the Austrian research community. BMVIT
has been one of the central interfaces between national and international research.
To highlight here is not just the formal mandate and representation in international
bodies but also the activities to mobilise the Austrian community. Looking back
the increased opportunities for international cooperation triggered the reflection
on ‘Austria’s perspective’ and sharpened the sense for the need of a more distinct
national profile.
Compared to other research policy fields the organisational setting of the Austrian
NNE RTD policy appears fairly concentrated with BMVIT being the core actor
integrating important tasks on the national and international level. Nevertheless
interviewees reported some tendency of excessive programming in the last years. This
does not refer to funding volumes available but to the number of programmes
addressing a relative small community at the same time. This has to be seen in the
context of the overall governance in the RTD policy system in Austria. Competition
between ministries for additional research funding (“Sonderforschungsmittel”)
distributed by the council of research and technology has played a role here. Given
the recent activities towards further concentrating research funding on the national
level it is hoped that this lack of co-ordination of themes, timing and procedures for
technology programmes gets solved in the future.
2.1.1
Priority setting
On first instance priorities in NNE RTD reflect the size of the country and its
endowment with energy sources. At this level it is not surprising that Austria has set
clear priorities on conservation and renewable energy. On a lower level of
aggregation priority setting is considered as core task of research policy. As for the
overall research landscape Austria has showed a relative low degree of thematic
specialisation. This has increasingly come under question and was linked to a deficit
of appropriate mechanisms for priority setting or – on a more cultural line of
argumentation – as a reluctance to take discriminating decisions. Only in the last
years – not least triggered by the upcoming concept of ERA – the pressure to
concentrate national funding sources increased. This applies also to NNE RTD.
An other framework condition affecting the priority setting process was given by the
regulative regime of the energy market before latest deregulation phase. The big
players in energy production and distribution were excluded from public research
funding as they were expected to finance their R&D investments by themselves. An
incentive to do so was given by the fact that R&D spending were taken into account
in the price fixing negotiations. Under this precondition public spending on NNE
RTD was historically driven by energy users on the one hand and specialised
suppliers of energy technology on the other hand.
Austria
7
A showcase of how priorities in NNE RTD are set in practice is the preparation of the
BMVIT programme on Technologies for Sustainable Development. The thematic
specification of the programme was developed with strong involvement of the
research community itself. BMVIT provided the communication platform and played
most of all the role of a moderator and mediator between different research interests.
The advantage of this high degree of participation of research performers was seen in
the close link to existing competences and the strong commitment of the research
community. On the negative side the danger selectivity and bias towards well
established networks with increased entry barriers for newcomers was mentioned.
This risk of establishing a closed shop was reduced by the involvement of
independent external experts on programme development and by contracting out the
programme management. Furthermore the use of tendering procedures in project
selection ensures transparency and openness of the programme implementation. As
for the result the thematic priorities of the programme were set in terms of technology
demand or application. Two main areas were identified: “Building of Tomorrow” and
“Factory of Tomorrow”.
A second approach for priority setting can be observed in the competence centres
programme K
plus
. As the name suggests one of the main objectives of K
plus
is to
establish internationally visible and competitive centres of technological competence
in specific areas. Interestingly policy completely abstained from thematic priority
setting on first hand. Priorities are set endogen only by the selection process which is
highly competitive and mostly based on scientific quality. This is a clear commitment
to build on existing national strengths rather than opening up new high potential
themes.
2.1.2
Role of Regions
In terms of funding sources NNE RTD is clearly a federal issue. According to the
latest statistics on energy research (BMVIT, Faninger 2003) only 5 % (see Exhibit
2-1) come from regional states budgets (“Bundesländer”). Nevertheless regions have
been playing an important role in mobilising research performers and most of all in
creating platforms for cooperation. Interesting examples in this respect are Styria and
Upper Austria. Both states have implemented technology clusters as a new instrument
for enhancing co-operation in sectors with strong regional specialisation. Energy
clusters (Energiecluster Oberösterreich) or in a more broader version clusters on
environmental technology (Eco&Co Steiermark) were not so much established on
basis of regional strength but with a strong commitment to technologies for
sustainable development.
Even though these Clusters have been focusing on business co-operation and
marketing platforms research and development has been playing an increasing role.
So far these initiatives are perceived as helpful platforms for bringing in new firms
and deepening regional linkages between science and enterprise sector. Thus the role
of Clusters was important for implementing national programmes as they prepared the
ground for co-operative R&D activities. At least in Upper Austria the Cluster
initiative was accompanied by a regional programme on energy technology. In the
case of Styria regional funding of energy related research is coordinated and
channelled through an regional network of research funding institution, public
administration and expert organisations (NOEST).
Austria
8
2.2
Public funding of NNE RTD
The following subchapter is based on the latest survey on energy research
expenditures commissioned by BMVIT and conducted by Prof. Faninger, university
of Klagenfurt.
Exhibit 2-1 illustrates the distribution of various funding sources across different
funding entities. As can be seen 95% of public funding of NNE RTD is provided at
the federal level. Compared to the respective figures in 1999 a substantial shift
between FFF (Austrian Industrial Research Promotion Fund) and Ministries can be
observed. The share of FFF decreased from 38% (1999) to 15% (2002). At the same
time Ministries increased their share from 13% (1999) to 30% (2002). To some
extend this shift resembles also a shift from bottom-up project funding (FFF) towards
programme funding.
The share of Universities own spending on NNE RTD (30%) remained unchanged.
Universities are the most important beneficiaries of public NNE RTD funding. If we
add 7% from FWF (Science Fund) that mostly funds research projects from
universities and take also into account that at least some of the ministries funding
goes to the universities the share of universities should lay around 40%. To mention
here is that the major fraction of the available funding for universities comes from
‘General University Funds’ and can not be decided upon within the NNE RTD policy
setting.
Exhibit 2-1: Public funding of energy research, main sources and research actors
Ministries
30%
Regional states
5%
CRO
13%
FFF
15%
FWF
7%
Universities
30%
Total funding volume 2002: 29,2 mio. EURO
Source: BMVIT, Faninger
According to the presented figures (see Exhibit 2-2) energy research relies to a big
extent to public funding. Since the year 2000 the share of public funding on total
expenditures is at a stable level of 75%. This figure has to be taken with caution. Our
interviewees warned in this context from over interpreting IEA statistics for which the
presented figures represent the latest Austrian contribution. Apparently a narrow
definition of RTD is likely to miss out on substantial relevant RTD activities in the
Austria
9
private sector
2
. However the used statistics are produced on a regular basis applying
the same mythology. Thus longer time series can be observed. Looking at the
development of overall funding volumes Exhibit 2-2 indicates a stagnation of total
spending on energy research.
Exhibit 2-2: Expenditure on energy research, public/private, 1997 - 2002
Source: BMVIT, Faninger
As for the distribution of funding volumes across thematic areas (see Exhibit 2-3 and
Exhibit 2-4) conservation and sustainable energy resource are clearly the two
dominating themes in Austria. Research in the field of renewable energy is very much
concentrated on Biomass and Solar.
2
Taking the total project volume of energy related research projects from firms supported by FFF as
a reference point one gets to a spending volume of the private sector between 12 to 15 mio.
EURO a year.
Austria
10
Exhibit 2-3: Expenditure on energy research across thematic areas, cumulated
1997 - 2002
RD&D expenditure 1997-2002: 222 mio. EURO
Conservation
32,4%
Fossil fuels
2,1%
Nuclear energy
7,5%
Technology for generation
and storage
14,1%
Solar
8,1%
Wind
1,1%
Biomass
20,1%
Geothermal energy
0,3%
Hydro
1,8%
Sustainable energy
sources
31,5%
Other energy research
12,4%
Source: BMVIT, Faninger
Over time the shares of single thematic areas have been changing somewhat with
renewable energy laying in the bandwidth between 37.6 % (1999) and 27.6% (2001).
The steadily increasing share of nuclear energy goes back to Austria’s participation in
international RTC activities in nuclear fusion.
Exhibit 2-4: Distribution of RD&D-expenditure across thematic areas, in %
35,3
31,6
30,5
33,8
32,3
31,6
27,7
33,1
37,6
31,8
27,6
30,5
13,7
13,9
9,4
12,8
19,2
15,4
13,2
13,9
13,2
11,0
10,6
12,4
5,3
1,5
1,9
1,7
1,6
1,1
4,9
6,1
7,5
8,8
8,7
9,1
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
Nuclear energy
Fossil fuels
Other energy research
Technology for generation
and storage
Sustainable energy
sources
Conservation
Source: BMVIT, Faninger
Austria
11
3
Internationalisation of NNE RTD from an Austrian
perspective
International co-operation in energy research ranks high on the agenda of the Austrian
NNE RTD policy. Before we explore internationalisation activities in more detail
some basic characteristics of Austria’s energy research community affecting
propensity and capability for international co-operation should be kept in mind:
•
High degree of organisation.
Austria’s energy research community is relatively
small and highly organised. The later is the result of a range of new policy
measures aiming at local clustering, establishment of national RTD networks
(Kind, Knet, Kplus) and the strong involvement of research performance in the
design process of the BMVIT programme on technologies for sustainable
development.
•
Strong organisational linkages between national research and EU FP
programmes.
This points to the central positioning of BMVIT as the main
funding entity of national research on one hand and its involvement in the
programme committee work on EU level. The international perspective is
furthermore strengthened by the fact that BMVIT hosts National contact points
(NCP) for the supporting participants in FP 6.
•
Profiling of national specialisation patterns.
Austria’s RTD policy increasingly
became aware of over fragmentation of national research. This holds also for
NNE RTD. As reaction a range of measures have been taken to better focus
national research funding and further developing national strengths. As result the
research community eventually was able to build up strong research groups in
specific niches (e.g. Biomass, Solar).
•
Strong commitment to international co-operation.
Following the discussion on
participation in EU-FP one might get the impression that international co-
operation has become a goal by itself rather than a mean to achieve specific
impacts not feasible on a national basis. At least implicitly national programmes
derive some of their rational from increasing the capability of the national
research community to participate in international programmes. On first sight the
underlying goal is maximising funding inflows from EU RTD budgets. This is
legitimate. However to some extent it distracts from the discussion on
complementarities and synergies between national and international research
agendas.
Overall participation in EU-FP’s dominates the discussion on internationalisation of
RTD-activities. Historically the membership in IEA has played an important role as
entry gate and platform for first international RTD co-operations. Bilateral co-
operation has played a minor role, even though quite some linkages have been
established with accession countries. Most of these linkages go back to regional
initiatives (e.g. in Upper Austria). Funding was also provided by BMLFUW
(“Ostförderung”). The RTD intensity of these bilateral activities seems to be limited
though.
A last interesting example of internationalisation which should be mentioned here is
the established linkage between TNO and Joanneum Research, both contract research
organisations with competence in energy research. TNO bought a minority stake of
Joanneum Research in 2002. The underlying financial transaction has partly been
devoted to building up co-operation platforms on the operational level. At this stage
Austria
12
impacts of this new linkages remain unclear. However this examples opens up a
scenario for new ways of how the concept of ERA might be put into practice: The
establishment of a European research market with multinational research performers.
3.1
Participation in EU FP programmes
The following subchapter reports the Austrian performance in EU FP 5. Overall the
energy research community has been fairly successful. If we take the share of
received funding in the respective area as indicator, Autria’s share (3.7%) in Energy
is well above its contribution to the EU-Budget (2.6%). From this perspective
Austria’s energy research community was the most successful group in Austria.
Exhibit 3-1: Austrian participation in EU-FP 5, overall share of received
funding
0
1
2
3
4
5
QoL
IST
Growth
Environm. Energy
IHP
LA So
% of total
funding volume
AT: BIP-Index (1999: 2,55)
AT: FTE-Index (1998: 2,17)
AT: Contribution to EU-Budget (2000: 2,6%)
AT: received funding in % of total funding volume
0
1
2
3
4
5
QoL
IST
Growth
Environm. Energy
IHP
LA So
% of total
funding volume
AT: BIP-Index (1999: 2,55)
AT: FTE-Index (1998: 2,17)
AT: Contribution to EU-Budget (2000: 2,6%)
AT: received funding in % of total funding volume
Source: BMVIT, proviso
The overall performance goes back to relatively high numbers of participations and
above average success rates of submitted proposals with Austrian participation.
Furthermore more successful projects were co-ordinated by Austrians than in other
research areas. Interestingly average consortia size with Austrian participation lays
significantly above the overall EU-average.
As for the type of organisations participating in FP 5 research organisations are
underrepresented whereas more consultants and big firms participated with better
success rates in relative terms.
An important role enabling this good performance played the strong specialisation in
a limited number of thematic areas within the whole energy area. Exhibit 3-2
illustrates the pattern of specialisation.
The specialisation pattern seems to be a fairly good fingerprint of Austria’s national
RTD competences. Beside the clear strength in Bio Energy Austria has shown clear
Austria
13
positive specialisation in a range of more technology diffusion oriented themes (e.g.
Sustainable Communities, OPET).
Exhibit 3-2: Thematic specialisation of Austria in RP 5, thematic priorities
0,0
0,5
1,0
1,5
2,0
2,5
3,0
3,5
5.1
5.2
5.3
5.4
6.1
6.2
6.3
6.4
6.5
6.6
8.1
8.2
OPET
Specialisation
: (RTA)
–
successful participations
Large Scale Electricity
Generation (
inkl
CHP)
Reduction
of
Emissions
Integr
. Ren.
Into Energy
Systems
Dev
. & Dem.
Renewables
Szenarios on
Supply
and
Demand
Technologies
Efficiency
of
Renewables
Efficient
Exploration,
Extraction
and Prod.
Storage
of
Energy Macro
and
Micro Scale
Transmission and
Distrib
. of
Enery
Rational End
Use
Global System Analysis
Tools of
Techn
.
Assessment
0,0
0,5
1,0
1,5
2,0
2,5
3,0
3,5
5.1
5.2
5.3
5.4
6.1
6.2
6.3
6.4
6.5
6.6
8.1
8.2
OPET
Specialisation
: (RTA)
–
successful participations
Large Scale Electricity
Generation (
inkl
CHP)
Reduction
of
Emissions
Integr
. Ren.
Into Energy
Systems
Dev
. & Dem.
Renewables
Szenarios on
Supply
and
Demand
Technologies
Efficiency
of
Renewables
Efficient
Exploration,
Extraction
and Prod.
Storage
of
Energy Macro
and
Micro Scale
Transmission and
Distrib
. of
Enery
Rational End
Use
Global System Analysis
Tools of
Techn
.
Assessment
0,0
0,5
1,0
1,5
2,0
2,5
3,0
3,5
TA A TA B TA C TA D
TA E
TA F TA G TA H
TA I
TA J TA K TA L KA 5 KA 6 KA 8 OPET
Specialisation
: (RTA)
–
successful participations
0,0
0,5
1,0
1,5
2,0
2,5
3,0
3,5
TA A TA B TA C TA D
TA E
TA F TA G TA H
TA I
TA J TA K TA L KA 5 KA 6 KA 8 OPET
Specialisation
: (RTA)
–
successful participations
Source: BMVIT, proviso
TA A
Application Driven Fuel Cell
TA G
Fuel Cells & H2
TA B
Bio Electricity
TA H
Bio Energy
TA C
Sustainable Communities
TA I
Integration
TA D
Clean Urban Transport
TA J
Cleaner Fuels for Transport
TA E
ECO Buildings
TA K
Storage
TA F
Gas Power Generation
TA L
PV
Austria
14
4
Main points for collaboration, synergy, complementarity
with regard to the NNE RTD ERA
The presented outline of latest developments in Austria’s NNE RTD system confirms
that the pursued strategy of strengthening national research capabilities in specific
niches has been quite successful. A number of research teams play in the European
league and is confident to do so also in the new setting of FP 6. On the face of it
collaboration in an European context seems to be every days business rather than a
challenge where national positions have be reconsidered. At a similar line of
argumentation complementarity seems not really to be an issue in the Austrian
discussion about ERA. The predominating perception is that the national research
agenda should translate into the European agenda as good as possible. In practice the
Austria’s position towards ERA comes down to feed in themes of national strengths
in the European programming process. This general picture of Austria’s perception of
what ERA should be, might be due to country size and its recent experience of
successful internationalisation.
Nevertheless behind this general picture some issues were brought up by our
interviewees with respect to collaboration, synergies and complementarity with regard
to the NNE RTD ERA:
•
National NNE RTD is focused on energy users (households, energy intensive
production processes) and specialised technology suppliers. The big players in
energy production and distribution seem to have fairly weak linkages to the
national research community. One reason being the exclusion from public RTD
funding before the liberalisation of energy markets. EU FP’s have proved to be an
important ‘substitute’ for national funding. This is underlined by the fact that
themes most relevant to the big energy production and distribution seem best
tackled on a European scale.
•
European research funding that is strongly devoted to scientific excellence is seen
in an ambivalent manner: On one hand there is a number of Austrian research
teams well positioned to participate in ‘excellent’ networks. On the other hand,
the danger of increased entry barriers in areas where Austria does not have such
strong RTD competence was mentioned. The message here is, that mechanisms
are needed to allow concentration on excellence in niches and at the same time,
mechanisms that maintain minimum levels of absorptive capacity in other fields.
•
The concept of ERA might prove hard to implement as long as priority setting on
the European level relies mostly on the involvement of national states. A
collection of national interests is seen as an inappropriate basis for developing
European themes.
5
Sources/References
Faninger G.: Energie – Forschung, Entwicklung und Demonstration, Ausgaben des
Bundes, der Länder und der Industrie in Österreich 2002 – Erhebung 2002. Published
in: Berichte aus Energie- und Umweltforschung 26/2003, BMVIT.
Österreichisches Energieforschungs- und Technologiekonzept, Juli 2002
Austria
15
BMVIT, Ing. Hübner: Presentation on the participation of Austria in FP 5, Data
processed by proviso, June 2003
6
Annex
Austria
16
Table 1: Energy research, expenditure in EURO, public/industry
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
Group
Public Industry
Public Industry
Public Industry
Public Industry
Public Industry
Public Industry
I
Conservation
8518
3576
6841
5460
7630
4385
7153
3304
9148
3674
7919
4360
1 1 Industry
1587
15
577
10
1631
25
3214
35
2986
41
2395
1817
1 2 Residential and commercial
3187
1526
3109
2180
3243
2180
2101
1453
4641
1817
4058
727
1 3 Transport
2792
1744
2919
2907
1734
1817
1190
1453
676
1453
812
1453
1 4 Other
952
291
236
363
1022
363
648
363
845
363
654
363
II
Fossil fuels
1696
109
590
0
648
109
445
73
633
0
411
0
2 0 Total oil and gas
244
0
244
0
139
0
34
0
287
0
132
0
2 1 Enhanced Oil and Gas
168
0
0
0
42
0
0
0
62
0
92
0
2 2 Refining, transport, storage
7
0
0
0
0
0
5
0
91
0
22
0
2 3 Oil shale and tar sands
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2 4 Others
69
0
244
0
97
0
29
0
134
0
18
0
3 0 Total coal
1452
109
346
0
509
109
411
73
346
0
279
0
3 1 Production prepar.. and transport
15
0
0
0
87
0
0
0
31
0
0
0
3 2 Combustion
595
0
284
0
393
0
394
0
289
0
105
0
3 3 Conversion
835
109
40
0
5
109
3
73
0
0
0
0
3 4 Others
7
0
22
0
24
0
14
0
26
0
174
0
III
Sustainable energy sources
7441
2042
9824
3053
9265
5522
6499
2943
7927
3016
9681
2689
4 0 Total solar
2073
145
3553
291
1843
290
2413
981
2068
908
2900
581
4 1 Heating and cooling
1224
145
1607
218
667
145
1444
872
1064
654
1422
218
4 2 Photo electric
825
0
1815
73
1082
145
649
109
771
254
1386
363
4 3 Thermal electric
24
0
131
0
94
0
320
0
233
0
92
0
5 0 Wind
462
0
567
0
337
0
409
0
185
0
391
0
Austria
17
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
Group
Public Industry
Public Industry
Public Industry
Public Industry
Public Industry
Public Industry
6 0 Ocean
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
7 0 Biomass
4127
1853
4547
2544
6736
5087
3526
1817
4981
1817
5864
1817
8 0 Geothermal energy
42
44
400
0
1
0
25
0
71
0
126
0
9 0 Hydro
737
0
757
218
348
145
126
145
622
291
400
291
9 1 Large (capacity > 10 MW)
611
0
445
0
122
0
126
145
90
0
103
0
9 2 Small (less < 10 MW)
126
0
312
218
226
145
0
0
532
291
297
291
IV
Nuclear energy
1671
0
2378
0
2952
0
2705
0
3356
82
3467
82
10 0 Total nuclear fission
561
0
0
0
382
0
0
0
250
0
169
0
10 1 Light water reactor
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
10 2 Other converter reactors
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
10 3 Fuel cycle
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
169
0
10 4 Nuclear supporting technology
561
0
0
0
382
0
0
0
250
0
0
0
10 5 Nuclear breader
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
11 0 Nuclear fusion
1110
0
2378
0
2570
0
2705
0
3106
82
3298
82
V
Technology for generation and storage
3678
1018
4168
1235
3030
654
3220
726
4605
3016
3789
2180
12 1 Electric power conversion
2091
618
1064
0
994
0
1426
581
980
145
1491
727
12 2 Electricity transm. and distribution
948
109
2061
1090
1303
363
1260
0
1063
327
1490
363
12 3 Energy storage
639
291
1043
145
733
291
534
145
2562
2544
808
1090
VI
Other energy research
2717
1817
3585
1817
3001
2180
3263
581
4202
0
3915
363
13 1 Energy system analysis
645
0
1306
0
942
0
1544
581
1271
0
1336
0
13 2 Other
2072
1817
2279
1817
2059
2180
1719
0
2931
0
2579
363
Source: BMVIT, Faninger
Belgium
19
Country study Belgium
Belgium
21
Contents:
1 Summary
23
2 From the Belgium NNE RTD system towards a NNE ERA: possible starting
points
24
2.1
Policy
24
2.2
Thematic complementarities / synergies
24
2.3
Institutional complementarities / synergies
25
2.4
Type of research
25
2.5
Possibilities for an NNE ERA
25
3 Overview of Belgium energy characteristics
26
3.1
Energy supply
26
3.2
Electricity production
27
3.3
Energy demand
28
3.4
Energy policy
29
4 Energy Research, Technology & Development
30
4.1
Introduction in Belgium RTD system
30
4.2
NNE RTD system
30
4.3
Organisation of the NNE RTD in Flanders
30
4.3.1
NNE Research institutes in Flanders
32
4.3.2
Energy RTD programmes
33
4.4
Organisation of the NNE RTD in The Walloon region
34
4.4.1
Research institutes in the Walloon Region
35
4.4.2
Energy RTD programmes
35
4.5
Energy RTD in Brussels-Capital
37
4.6
Industrial energy RTD
37
5 Research priorities in Energy RTD
38
5.1
Flanders
38
5.2
Walloon region
38
6 Priority setting process
38
6.1
Flanders
39
6.2
Walloon region
39
Belgium
23
1
Summary
Belgium is a federal country and has, besides the federal government, three regional
governments for the regions of Flanders, the Walloon region and Brussels-Capital.
The regions are leading in many policy issues, including energy and innovation
policy, and on have their own responsibility for the promotion of (NNE) RTD.
The Flanders and the Walloon region RTD system and priority setting process differ
in many ways. A real specific NNE RTD policy does not exists, in both Flanders and
the Walloon region it forms part of the general RTD strategy.
The Flanders RTD system has a generic character for industrial and university support
and a more specific system for institute support. There are no specific data on the
amount of NNE RTD funding in the generic programmes but this is estimated by
Technopolis at
€
5-10 mln/yr. The amount of institute NNE RTD support is estimated
at
€
15-20 mln.
The Walloon region RTD system has some specific NNE programmes, but is also
mainly bottom-up, aiming at creating new processes, products and companies. The
amount of government NNE RTD support is estimated at
€
10 mln/yr.
Total Belgian NNE RTD government support is therefore
€
30-40 mln/yr.
Important players from Belgium from an NNE ERA point of view are VITO (general
energy technology) and especially IMEC (in the field of solar cells) that already
participate in and coordinate FP6 projects.
Capabilities in coordinating European projects are also found in (many) Belgian
universities (though not in the NNE field (yet)).
The industrial infrastructure in Belgium in the NNE field in general is not very strong.
Belgium has only one major industrial energy company (Electrabel).
In the area of solar cells there is however a cluster of companies around IMEC which
is strong.
Governments of both Flanders and the Walloon region have recently raised their
ambitions in the area of NNE and are starting activities in the areas of hydrogen and
fuel cells.
To summarize, the NNE RTD policies in Flanders and the Walloon region are not
very explicit, and the funds available are limited in compared to some other nations.
Capabilities do however exist to participate in the European Research area. In general
the universities, institutes and governments of Flanders and the Walloon region as
well as a number of Belgian companies have shown capabilities of participating and
leading European projects. More specifically in the field of NNE RTD, IMEC and
VITO are already participating (and leading) in FP6 projects.
Belgium shall not be able to participate in an NNE ERA over the whole range of the
scientific field. However on topics like solar cells they already have a leading role
while on new topics like fuel cells and hydrogen they have an ambition that mat be
developed further.
Belgium
24
2
From the Belgium NNE RTD system towards a NNE ERA:
possible starting points
In this chapter the NNE RTD systems in Flanders and The Walloon region are
described from an ERA point of view. In the following chapters (3-6) the NNE RTD
systems, budgets, and priorities in Flanders and The Walloon region are described in
more detail.
2.1
Policy
Today Belgium is a Federal Authority. Institutional reforms implemented over the
past three decades led to progressive transfer of several responsibilities, so far in the
hands of the central state, to the regions (Flanders, Brussels and The Walloon region).
This did not, to a large extent effect
energy
policy. The objectives of Belgium’s
overall energy policy have not changed since the early 1970s. Currently, the main
energy policy goals of the federal government are rational use of energy, progressive
phasing-out of nuclear energy and the accelerated liberalisation of the energy market.
In the field of
RTD
policy "prime" responsibility is assigned to the regions. The
Federal Authority, however, exceptionally still withholds certain "exclusive"
responsibilities. Some of these are subject to co-operation agreements signed with the
federated authorities concerned. The regions are responsible for the general support of
research carried out in higher education institutions and provide the general support of
industrial and technological research and innovation. The Federal Authority, besides
supporting research required for the fulfilment of its own assignments, also finances
the federal scientific institutions (e.g. the nuclear
research centre), space research
conducted in an international context, data transfer networks between scientific
institutions as well as several other activities requiring uniform implementation at
national or international level. As a consequence, the regions have a high degree of
autonomy with respect to RTD policy. At the same time, however, structures of
dialogue and co-operation mechanisms between the various federal and regional
authorities has been set up, both at ministerial level (the Inter-ministerial Conference
for Science Policy, IMCSP) and at administrative level (the International Co-
operation Commission, CIS, the Federal Co-operation Commission, CFS and their
specialised groups).”
There is no explicit policy in Belgium (at federal or regional level) on
non nuclear
energy RTD
. However within the general (and in Flanders generic) RTD policies
NNE RTD does have it’s place, and there are various groups and organisations that
perform NNE RTD.
2.2
Thematic complementarities / synergies
Specific budgets in Belgium for NNE RTD are fairly small compared to the more
NNE RTD oriented countries, and do mainly exist in the Walloon region. In Flanders
NNE RTD is supported from in generic innovation programmes (no data are available
on the amount). There is also NNE research financed in institutes (IMEC and VITO).
Belgium
25
2.3
Institutional complementarities / synergies
In Belgium are no energy specific research institutes, however there are two research
institutes in Flanders with significant energy related RTD activities: VITO (a.o.
energy technology and rational use of energy) and IMEC (solar cells).
There are different NNE RTD activities set up within the seven universities in
Flanders as well.
In the Walloon region there does not exist a specific NNE RTD centre. Research is
performed in university research units. There are e.g. research units from the Walloon
region in IEA implementing agreements, such as ECERC (COMBUSTION), ECBS
and SHAC.
2.4
Type of research
Long term strategic NNE RTD actions in Belgium are mainly embedded within the
research centres VITO and IMEC, some research in the universities of both Flanders
and the Walloon region, and in the participation of the Walloon region and Flanders
in the HY-CO ERA-NET.
In the period 1993-1997, Flanders operated a long-term programme for the Promotion
of Energy Technology (VLIET). Today the financing mechanisms are no longer
specifically aiming at certain technologies or application areas, but are generic, and
open for all scientific or technological disciplines. There is no monitoring of the
amount NNE-related research in the programmes. However some, mainly shorter
term research will be present in these programmes.
Most NNE research in The Walloon region is considered to be short and medium term
oriented. The "industrial basic research" made in university units lasts from two to
four years, and produces results that have to be kept by companies which will
continue applied research during two years in order to develop a marketable product,
process or service.
SMEs and in Flanders the institutes benefit most of the public funds for NNE RTD. In
Flanders 50 % of the RTD funds flow to SMEs and in The Walloon region even up to
70 %.
2.5
Possibilities for an NNE ERA
To assess the opportunities to integrate Belgium NNE RTD efforts into the EU NNE
RTD policy it is essential to take in account the high autonomy of the federated
entities. Structures of dialogue and co-operation mechanisms between the various
federal and regional authorities have been set up, both at ministerial and
administrative level.
Both Flanders and The Walloon region participate in IEA agreements and have an
active policy to stimulate RTD in general. There are not many specific NNE RTD
programmes.
The Flemish and Walloon Region both have a big involvement in NNE-ERA nets.
Flanders and The Walloon region participate in the ERA–NET Hy-Co (HYDROGEN
- CO-ORDINATION) with an involvement to annual Hydrogen and fuel cell
programmes. Both regions are represented in the mirror group of the European
Belgium
26
Hydrogen and Fuel Cell Technology Platform. Flanders will participate in the PV-
ERA-NET
The Walloon region co-ordinates ERA-STAR REGIONS, the ERA-NET about
aerospace. The Region has also developed 12 "pôles d'excellence that are co-
ordinators or partners of several research projects in the FP6, or EUREKA (not
specific on NNE RTD). While these activities are not in the specific NNE RTD area
they show the capacity of the Walloon Region to fit into research at the European
level.
In general terms, the involvement of Belgian actors in the EU Framework
Programmes is relative low and international collaboration seems to be rather limited,
with exception for the two research institutes (VITO and IMEC) and some specific
research groups at the universities. With the start of FP6 (first call of TREN and
Energy) and its structure of NoE’s and IP’s that oriented on strong research
partnerships with top institutes in Europe, we notice only participation of VITO,
IMEC and the Catholic University of Louvain in the medium-to long term oriented
Integrated Projects. Policy actions are planned to reinforce the Belgian participation
(especially towards FP7), both in Flanders as well as in The Walloon region.
3
Overview of Belgium energy characteristics
3.1
Energy supply
Belgium has no oil or natural gas resources, the last coalmines were closed in 1993,
and the use of renewable energy sources is, although rapidly growing, still limited
with a share of 2 % in total energy supply in 2003. The energy supply is for 75 %
based on imported fossil fuels. The remaining energy comes from nuclear power. The
energy supply per fuel in Belgium is shown in Exhibit 3-1
Belgium
27
Exhibit 3-1 Energy supply Belgium 1973-2010
Source: EIA In-Depth review Belgium, 2004
The consumption of primary energy registers a remarkable increase with 4,4% in 2003
and contrasts clearly with the downward tendency recorded in 2002. In spite of the heat
wave of August 2003, the average climate was less mild than this of the exceptional year
2002. The climatic rigour observed in 2003 is similar to the one of the year 2001 and due
to this induces a level of primary energy consumption that is very close to the one
observed in 2001.
With regard to the differences in consumption between 2002 and 2003 the following can
be said:
•
The consumption of coal went down with 5% because of a reduction in demand of
the coking plants and the residential sector. The industrial sector and the steel
industry in particular made a considerable progress in 2003.
•
Sales of natural gas (+7,3%) especially developed in the industrial sector and in
the sector of the production electricity. Sales to the residential sector and
equivalents also progressed in 2003, especially taking into account the increase of
the number of degree-days.
•
The consumption of petroleum (+8,1%) increased fairly significant
•
Nuclear energy remained stable (+0,0% ) with an average use rate of 88,4%
•
The contribution of renewables increased mainly because wind energy went up
(+36,8% in net production, in comparison with 2002)
3.2
Electricity production
With regard to the net production of electricity, an increasing appeal has been made to
power plants working on gaseous, liquid and solid fuels.
Energy supply Belgium
1998-2003
0
10000
20000
30000
40000
50000
60000
70000
1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003
Year
KTOE
renewables
nuclear energy
natural gas
petroleum
solid fuels
Belgium
28
In comparison with the years before the appeal to nuclear energy practically remains
unchanged (around 59%) . In 2003 wind energy increases, displaying a growth of
36,8%.
In 2000 the federal government has set a higher target for renewables, at 3% in 2004
and 5% in 2010. The regional governments have established even more ambitious
targets (see section 3.4).
Biomass used to be the most important renewable source in Belgium with a 90%
share of total renewable energy production, followed by hydropower. Now wind
energy is increasing rapidly.
3.3
Energy demand
While total final energy consumption decreased from the 1970s to the early 1980s, it
has grown since then, except for the early 1990s when there was a recession. In 2002
there was a decrease in energy use (influenced by the high outside temperature), while
in 2003 the energy use was again on the level of 2001.
In 1999, the industrial sector had the biggest share (41.6%) of total final energy
consumption. The share of the different sector in total energy demand is shown in
Exhibit 3-2.
Exhibit 3-2 Energy demand in Belgium per economic sector for the period
1973-2010
* Includes commercial, public service and agricultural sectors.
Source: IEA
Belgium
29
3.4
Energy policy
Each regional government in Belgium has its own responsibilities for designing and
implementing energy policies, while the federal government is responsible for those
issues that need to be dealt with at national level, like nuclear energy, large
distribution networks, and tax on energy. In general the regional governments put
more emphasis on renewable energy and energy efficiency.
The objectives of Belgium’s overall energy policy have not changed since the early
1970s. They include security of supply based on diversification of geographical
sources and fuels, energy efficiency, transparent and competitive energy prices, and
environmental protection. Currently, the main energy policy goals of the federal
government are rational use of energy, progressive phasing-out of nuclear energy and
the accelerated liberalisation of the energy market.
In the context of the EU Burden-Sharing Agreement, Belgium is committed to reduce
its greenhouse gas emissions by 7.5% for the 2008-2012 period, compared to 1990
levels. The Federal State and the three Regions agreed on the necessity to clarify their
respective responsibilities as regards the compliance with international commitments.
Therefore, an internal burden sharing was negotiated between the Federal State and
the three Regions, under the aegis of the National Climate Commission (the executive
body of the Cooperation Agreement, see above).
This internal burden sharing agreement defines the targets of the three Regions as
follows:
Wallonia:
emissions 1990 - 7,5 %
=
50.23 Mton CO
2
-eq
Flanders:
emissions 1990 - 5,2 %
=
83.37 Mton CO
2
-eq
Brussels-Capital:
emissions 1990 + 3,5 %
=
4.13 Mton CO
2
-eq
The sum of these regional targets exceeds the national target. The federal authority
will compensate this difference (2.46 Mton / year) by the acquisition of emission
allowances on the international market. Up to the end of 2007, the federal government
will only make use of joint implementation (JI) and clean development mechanisms
(CDM) projects. Afterwards, the internal emission trading (IET) could be used as
well, only if the gap can not be totally filled by the credits obtained from JI and CDM
projects, given the limited budget available for those credits.
Like other EU countries Belgium has also accepted the Kyoto protocol, which
reduces the emission of CO2. To achieve the goals established in the Kyoto protocol
energy policy in Flanders is aimed at:
•
Rational use of energy (REG) by reducing the use of energy in the households
sector and establishing energy efficiency gains in the industry and service sector
•
Higher share of renewable energy in global energy production; 3% in 2004 and
5% in 2010
•
Social acceptable prices for energy
Since the 2001 in-depth review, the main developments in Belgian energy policy have
been the taking of major steps towards the establishment and implementation of the
National Climate Plan, the advances in market liberalisation and a progressive
phasing-out of nuclear energy.
Belgium
30
4
Energy Research, Technology & Development
In this chapter the Belgium NNE RTD system is described. The Belgium (NNE) RTD
system consist of an independent system in Flanders and an independent system in
The Walloon region. The description of the two systems is based on interviews with
government representatives in Flanders
3
and The Walloon region
4
.
4.1
Introduction in Belgium RTD system
An overall Belgium RTD system does not exist but there are separate Flemish and
Walloon RTD systems with limited coordination between the two. The federal
government is responsible for scientific research in the fields of space research and
nuclear energy research. Furthermore it promotes knowledge exchange between
(inter)national research institutes. The three regions in Belgium (Flanders, The
Walloon region, Brussels-Capital) are competent for research related to the economy,
energy policy (excluding nuclear), public works, the environment, and transport. This
covers support for basic technological and industrial research, the development of
prototypes, new products and production processes, the distribution and transfer of
technologies and technological innovation. The public support involves companies as
well as universities and research centres.
The RTD system lacks major Belgium companies and consequently their R&D
efforts. Some foreign multinationals have located their production activities in
Belgium, especially industrial half fabricates and car manufacturing, but R&D
activities of these companies are usually located abroad. Public RTD support is
therefore more focussed on Belgium small- and medium seized enterprises (SME)
then in other EU countries.
4.2
NNE RTD system
The same remarks that are valid for the general Belgium RTD system are valid for the
specific NNE RTD system. The regions therefore are the leading government level.
As will be described in the next paragraphs.
At the federal level the Minister for Economy, Energy, Foreign Trade and Science
Policy has the responsibility for the field of energy policy and research.
The Belgium regions are independent of the federal government in their RTD policy
on NNE RTD. Therefore the different NNE RTD systems in Flanders and The
Walloon region are described separately.
4.3
Organisation of the NNE RTD in Flanders
The Flemish NNE RTD system is shown in Exhibit 4-1. In Flanders the Department
of Economy, Employment, Internal Affairs and Agriculture is in charge of energy
matters and the Department of Environment and Infrastructure deals with
environmental matters. The Department of Education and the Department of Science,
3
Veerle Lories. Ministry of the Flanders Government: Administration of Science and Innovation
(AWI). Brussels
4
Alain Stephenne. Direction Generale des Technologies, de la Recherche et de l’ Energie
(DGTRE). Namur
Belgium
31
Innovation and Media are responsible for the science and innovation policy, which is
executed by the Administration of Science and Technology (AWI). Two intermediary
organizations are responsible for the allocation and distribution of RTD funds:
•
IWT-Flanders: Institute for the promotion of innovation by science and
technology in Flanders. IWT implements policy related to industry and distributes
the funds amongst businesses and research institutes.
•
FWO Flanders: Fund for scientific research in Flanders. FWO implements policy
with regard to basic research at the universities.
Exhibit 4-1 Flemish NNE RTD system
With regard to energy related RTD the research institutes of VITO and IMEC are of
interest. Besides the NNE-research at the research institutes different NNE RTD
activities are set up within the seven universities in Flanders.
In the government policy statement (2004-2009) of the new Flemish Government
specific attention is given towards the stimulation of research and investments in
renewable energy. As a consequence new policy initiatives in that field can be
expected in the near future.
Belgium
32
4.3.1
NNE Research institutes in Flanders
4.3.1.1
VITO
VITO is the Flemish Institute for technological research and is a specialised research
centre with a semi-private status that operates under the auspices of the Flemish
government. The energy division consists of several research centres that focus on:
•
Rational use of energy
•
Transport and the environment
•
Product and process assessments
•
Energy technology
More recently VITO started a specific strategic research activity dedicated to
hydrogen and fuel cell technology. Within this particular context a thematic
innovation network entitled “Flemish Co-operation Network Fuel Cells” has been
launched, in which a number of companies and research institutes join forces in order
to stimulate information dissemination and innovation in the field of hydrogen and
fuel cell technology. The network is currently working on defining research projects
with a common strategy and vision.
The turnover of VITO is
€
51,4 million (2003), partly paid by the Flemish
government, through a yearly budgetary allocation. It is estimated that one-third of
the turnover is related to NNE RTD
5
. Every five years an agreement is signed
between the Flemish government and VITO, which secures the basic funding of
VITO, but also obliges VITO to conduct strategic research and contract research. The
most important elements in the last agreement (period 2001-2005) are: strategic
research with industrial relevance, more focus on fewer research themes, and
internationalisation of research.
4.3.1.2
IMEC
IMEC, the Interuniversity Micro Electronics Centre, founded in 1984, is Europe's
leading independent research centre in the field of microelectronics, nanotechnology,
enabling design methods and technologies for ICT systems. In 2003 IMEC's revenues
amounted 145 million Euros. IMEC generates 76% of its total budget, the remaining
24% being funded by the Flemish community, through an agreement with the Flemish
government that also secures a basic funding. Similar to the VITO, an agreement is
signed for a period of 5 years. Development of solar cells is one of its strategic
programs with the aim to provide low-cost, highly efficient solar cell technologies as
to make photovoltaic energy generation an economically viable renewable energy
source (Solar
+
program). The Solar
+
program is covering technologies based on
crystalline Si, active organic layers and high-efficiency mechanical stacks
incorporating III-V and Ge sub cells. Specific technological topics that are
investigated at IMEC:
•
Solar cells based on crystalline Si
•
High-efficiency photovoltaic stacks
•
Organic solar cells
5
Ministry of Flanders; Science and Innovation Administration. 2003. The Science, Technology
and Innovation Information Guide. p 67-68. Brussels.
Belgium
33
IMEC has being partner and/or coordinator of many PV-related projects in the former
and current EC framework programs and has a large portfolio of ESA-projects. Its
R&D-efforts are supporting the local industry that is active over the whole value
chain from the materials production to the production of solar cells and modules and
their integration into custom-tailored PV-systems.
The budget of IMEC related to PV-related research can be estimated up to
€
4,5
million per year.
4.3.2
Energy RTD programmes
In Flanders, the RTD budget for energy was
€
14 million in 1999
6
. This represented
62% of total R&D expenditures in the field of non-nuclear energy in Belgium, by
then.
The budgets for innovation stimulation in Flanders are divided by IWT.
From 1993-1996 IWT managed the Flemish programme for the Promotion of Energy
Technology (VLIET). This programme had a total budget of
€
20 million for the
period 1993-1996. Around 10 % of the budget was devoted to projects supporting the
Flemish energy policy and 25 % was devoted to projects in the fields of renewables.
In 1997 VLIET-bis was started with a budget of
€
7 million.
From 1999, IWT changed its funding policy from a thematic oriented system towards
a bottom-up organised system (see also 6.1). From that time NNE RTD in Flanders is
channelled through the innovation stimulation programmes co-ordinated by the IWT.
As already mentioned, these new instruments (strategic basic research, RTD-projects
for industrial basic research activities and projects for industrial development) can be
considered as "bottom-up" initiatives. They are open for all scientific or technological
disciplines.
A specific stimulus towards rational energy or renewable energy research is given by
the introduction of the “Sustainable Development” programme (SDR). This
programme requires that a certain percentage of all funding in the different Flemish
programmes must be devoted to Sustainable Development (in 2004: 18%). If this
target is not met Sustainable Development projects that have been submitted will be
positively discriminated. Extra financial incentives (+10%) are available for those
projects that can prove significant added value in terms of sustainable technological
development (eco-efficiency improvement). In 2004-2005 IWT will analyze the
outcomes of this SDR-approach. One of the outcomes of this project will be an
overview of the NNE activities in this programme.
On top of the bottom-up financing programs, the Flemish Government launched in
2004 the so-called Environmental Innovation Platform. This platform brings together
companies, research institutions and public services active in the field of
environmental and energy technologies. The platform will encourage research in
strategic environmental and energy areas through clustering formation and scaling up.
Additional financial support will be allocated to set up a Flemish centre of excellence
in the field of Environmental and Energy technologies. This centre of excellence will
6
International Energy Agency. 2000. Energy policies of IEA countries: Belgium 2001 review.
ISBN: 92-64-18734-0
Belgium
34
be a virtual cluster of knowledge and expertise in the research institutes, universities
and high-schools in Flanders and will focus on:
•
valorisation-development of existing knowledge and expertise towards market
applications
•
new “knowledge-development” in a limited amount of topics by clustering the
existing research capacity.
For its start-up phase (2004), 7 m
€
has been allocated to this centre of excellence.
Beside the R&D programmes run by IWT, the Department of Economy,
Employment, Internal Affairs and Agriculture, which is in charge of the Flemish
energy policy, created a fund for demonstration projects for energy technologies.
This fund wants to stimulate new innovative production procedures and/or
technologies focusing on a rational use of energy in the industry and service sector.
These demonstration projects must comply with the priority themes defined on a
yearly base by the government. Current priorities are:
•
rational use of energy in the industry and service sector, with emphasis on process
integrated, source-directed technologies
•
renewable energy sources with emphasis on biomass
Because the lack of data from generic programmes only a rough estimation of funds
involved can be made. Technopolis estimates that the total amount of government
NNE RTD in Flanders is between
€
20-30 mln.
4.4
Organisation of the NNE RTD in The Walloon region
In the Walloon Region, the Minister for Scientific Research and New Technologies is
in charge of RTD in general, meanwhile since 1999, the Minister for Energy is
responsible for the stimulation and promotion of NNE RTD. The D.G.T.R.E.
(Direction Générale des Technologies, de la Recherche et de l'Énergie) is the
Administration in charge of applying the ministries 'policy.
A strategic approach in the definition and orientation of research and innovation
politics was developed since mid '90.
Since 2003, a new "programme wallon d'actions innovatrices" is in course, with a
European FEDER sustain.
The strategy aims at the following objectives :
•
encourage partnerships and technological synergies, also beyond the borders of
the Walloon Region ;
•
reinforce the innovation potential of the Walloon Region ;
•
organise a net of supply of competencies adapted to the needs of the enterprises.
The Region provides :
•
grants and refundable loans for companies. The Region encourages co-operation
with universities ;
•
follow-up of the EUREKA tool in business ;
•
management of resources provided to companies under structural funds and
international programmes such as EUCLIDE.
The Region is eager to develop innovation in SMEs. It has therefore drawn up several
policy schemes grants such as:
Belgium
35
•
RIT (Responsable à l'Innovation Technologique) grants for subsidising the
salaries of persons at SMEs investigating the prospects of and areas related to
innovation. It includes a technical support (ST) scheme which pays for a
feasibility study ;
•
technical and economic assistance (ETE) tackles strategic marketing ;
•
sectoral studies (ES) are used to analyse a specific sector with a view to targeting
technological clusters that could be exploited by SMEs ;
RIT Europe examines the possibility of developing technological co-operation with
one or several SMEs located in one or more EC member states, other than Belgium.
Moreover, the Walloon Region supports "inventors" by enabling them to develop and
finalise new products on their own without requiring any corporate assistance. This
grant covers the costs of protecting industrial property rights, of producing a
prototype and carrying out tests by a certified body.
The Region indirectly supports SMEs by funding thirty research centres, which
perform research programmes in important areas for innovation. The Walloon Region
also financially supports the activities of 50 "guides", i.e. scientific experts attached to
these centres supporting and advising businesses, especially SMEs, in matters relating
to innovation.
The DGTRE identifies priority areas for research, allocates research funding from
governmental budgets, sets up and takes operational responsibility for RTD
programmes, conducts evaluations of submitted proposals and follow-up of selected
projects. It also has a role in disseminating scientific content to the public.
The budget for public RTD support in the Walloon Region is generally not allocated
according to sector or field, and the projects that are selected may concern a variety of
interests, not just energy.
4.4.1
Research institutes in the Walloon Region
The Walloon Region has many research centres with different statutes, activities and
financing sources. With the grant of the European structural funds (FEDER and FSE),
the Walloon Region has developed 12 "pôles d'excellence" .Some research centres or
"pôles d'excellence" are co-ordinators or partners of several research projects in the
FP6, or EUREKA. There is no specific NNE RTD centre.
The ISSEP (Institut Scientifique de Service Public), former INIEX (Institut National
des Industries Extractives) receives an annual sustain of
€
8,5 million (outside of the
programme budgets). Previously implied in research programme of valorisation of
coal products, coal gasification and conversion of coal products, it orientates its
activities towards environmental research.
4.4.2
Energy RTD programmes
The budget of D.G.T.R.E. is
€
234,2 millions in 2003. Since 1999, there is a specific
budget allocated for energy RTD. The budget of DGTRE for energy was
€
19,7
Belgium
36
million in 2001
7
. Besides the funding of RTD, this also includes dissemination of
science and technology, energy efficiency subsides, promotion of energy efficiency,
data collecting, studies, etc.
Based on the IEA-classification, the RTD budget of DGTRE for NNE is almost
€
10
million a year. It encompasses grants for research projects, but not the general sustain
to research centres or universities.
Exhibit 4-2 shows the amount of public funded NNE RTD for the period 1991-2001.
Exhibit 4-2 Walloon public RTD budget for NNE (1991-2001)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
RTD
Energy
budget
(Million
Euro)
Source: DGTRE 2001
Since 1990, the Walloon Region (via Belgium) participates in implementing
agreements of the IEA, granting research teams for an amount of
€
1,4 mln/yr.
The public grant to enterprises is about
€
5 million a year.
The Walloon Region regularly launches calls of proposals on specific thematic
priorities of research, named "Programmes Mobilisateurs", the results of which are
likely to be of interest to existing companies or might lead to the creation of new
enterprises. Programmes in the area of NNE RTD were:
•
Cogénération : l'Énergie totale (combined heat and power generation) : 2 calls, on
the priority thematic of micro Cogeneration and Biomass Cogeneration. The
budget for the period 2000-2001 was
€
5,1 million.
•
PIMENT (Projets Innovants relatifs à la Maîtrise de l'Énergie utilisant de
Nouvelles Techniques) : 2 calls, on the general subject of energy efficiency and
reduction of CO
2
emissions. The budget for the period 2002-2003 was
€
8,4
millions.
•
PILES À COMBUSTIBLE (fuel cells) : materials and components of PEM fuel
cells. Deadline: 1st of October 2004. Budget :
€
1,2 million.
7
Direction Generale des Technologies, de la Recherche et de l’ Energie. 2001. Rapport’d
activites 2001.
Belgium
37
4.5
Energy RTD in Brussels-Capital
Brussels-Capital does not have a specific R&D budget for energy and therefore
informally collaborates with the other regions. In Brussels-Capital, the Brussels
Institute for the Management of the Environment (IBGE/BIM) is responsible for all
energy-related issues in the region.
4.6
Industrial energy RTD
There are several companies in Belgium that perform research in the NNE area.
Below some examples (not an exhaustive list):
Laborelec
is a Belgium laboratory for scientific and technical research in the
electricity sector and is owned by Electrabel and SPE. The turnover in 1999 was
€
32
million, exceeding the regional governments combined R&D budgets. The research
areas include energy audits, combustion, electromagnetic compatibility, power
quality, condition monitoring and predictive maintenance for combined-cycle power
plants and CHP installations and biomass for electricity generation.
Photovoltech
is a spin-off company of IMEC using the proprietary process for
multicrystalline Si solar cells, developed in the IMEC-pilotline, of which Electrabel
and Total Fina Elf are the main shareholders. The company has at present a
production capacity for solar cells of about 10 MW, but a further substantial
expansion is to be expected in near future. This production capacity is partially used
for the production of classical two-side contacted solar cells, but also allows for the
production of back-contacted solar cells. The latter product represents a strong
improvement on the level of aesthetics and is therefore perfectly suited for integration
in the building environment. BIPV (building-integrated PV) is the strongest growing
market segment with a growth rate near to 70%/year.
Soltech
is another spin-off company of IMEC, which is active in the design, and
production of custom-tailored PV-systems and modules.
UMICORE
is a large non-ferro material producer. Within the context of PV, the
company is known for its dominant position on the market of epi-ready Ge-substrates,
which are mainly used for space solar cells. The company supplies more than 90% of
the Ge-substrates needed worldwide for this activity. In order to preserve this
position, UMICORE is collaborating with IMEC towards the development of very
thin Ge-substrates and on alternative Si-based substrates suitable for high-quality
growth of active III-V layers. In order to check and improve the epi-readiness of the
Ge-substrates UMICORE is also involved in MOCVD-growth. This MOCVD-
capacity is co-developed with and supported by IMEC.
The
UCB Surface Specialities
is part of the UCB Group is an international
pharmaceutical and speciality chemical company. This company is specifically
interested in the incorporation of its sealant layers in organic solar cells to improve
stability and in the development of active compounds for organic solar cells
3E
is a consulting company with specific interest for the Solar Roadmap
development and the implications on electricity grid architecture
Electrabel
is the main Belgian Electricity company. Apart from their involvement in
several start-ups as mentioned above they follow up PV-introduction on measures to
stabilise voltage and frequency of the grid and have other NNE RTD activities.
Other companies Wanson (industrial boilers), Solvay (PEM membranes for fuel
cells), Dow Corning (PV cells), etc.
Belgium
38
5
Research priorities in Energy RTD
As described in 4.2 the Regions are in charge of their own industrial and applied
research policy.
5.1
Flanders
As mentioned before there are no thematic priorities in the Flemish RTD support
programmes. Because the institutional financing plays a large role in the Flemish
RTD system the priorities of the relevant research institutes are the main RTD
priorities for Flanders, i.e. solar cells (IMEC) and energy technology and innovative
decentralised energy systems (VITO, Hydrogen and fuel cell technology, micro
turbines, combined heat and power generation and sustainable energy sources are
important components of this research field).
Due to the horizontal organisation of the RTD financing programs in Flanders no
recent exact figures on the overall NNE-RTD related funds can be given.
5.2
Walloon region
Following the IEA classification, the major research areas are oriented to renewable
energy (45%) and energy conservation (35%), followed by power and storage
technologies (15%).
The research priorities are :
•
Combustion of fossil fuels
through the IEA implementing agreement
"Combustion" ;
•
Building
, climate-sensitive architecture and passive solar energy technology in
buildings, mainly through the IEA implementing agreements SHAC (Solar
Heating and Cooling) and ECBCS (Energy Conservation in Buildings and
Community Systems).
•
Production of energy from Biomass and waste
, mainly Gasification of Biomass,
combined heat and power ;
•
Catalysts
, for several uses : catalytic combustion of Biomass, catalytic
purification of combustion gases, hydrogen production from natural gas and
alcohol, low temperature combustion of natural gas ;
•
Hydrogen and fuel cells
;
•
recently,
Solar thermal and photovoltaics.
6
Priority setting process
In this chapter the priority setting process in Flanders and the Walloon region is
described. The characterisation of the priority setting process is based on the
interviews with government representatives.
Belgium
39
6.1
Flanders
As mentioned in section 4.3 there are no specific thematic priorities for NNE RTD in
Flanders. The priority setting process is bottom-up organised. There are no thematic
restrictions and researchers are relative free in the selection of research projects.
Anyone has a good chance in obtaining funds for research. The most important
criteria scientific are quality and utility perspectives of the research. Although no
thematic programs in NNE RTD are set up, research in this field is encouraged
through the extra funding mechanism for projects that focus on sustainable
development.
In order to improve the organisation, co-ordination and priority setting of research in
the field of environmental and energy-technology the Flemish Government
established in 2004 the Environmental Technology Platform. This concept aims at
improving synergy between innovation, environmental and energy policy in
Flanders. But also a tuning to federal and European policy actions, as far as
relevant, is of concern of this platform. The platform will encourage and realise a
better and more co-ordinated use of the previously mentioned financial instruments
in the field of energy and environmental technologies. On top of that, this platform
will create a new (virtual) centre of excellence for environmental and energy
technologies. Research priorities of this centre will be defined by the steering
committee of the Environmental Technology Platform.
6.2
Walloon region
Only since 1999, there are specific actions in the energy RTD field, except for the
participation in IEA implementing agreements, where the Walloon Region is present
since 1990.
The Co-generation programme (2000-2001) was established in co-operation and
discussion with involved actors of the Walloon RTD system. The different thematic
topics were narrow defined. 31 proposals were submitted, 13 were granted for a
support of 4,5 M
€
. There were relatively few proposals submitted, but it was in line
with the narrow subject and the possibilities of the Walloon Community.
For the programming of PIMENT (2002-2003), another approach was chosen. The
programme was very wide oriented with little thematic focus (energy efficiency and
reduction of CO2 emissions, plus an emphasise on buildings in 2003). 57 proposals
were submitted, of which 17 proposals were granted for a global amount of 8,2 M
€
.
More proposals were submitted, in accordance with the more wide topics.
In 2004, a Fuel Cell programme was launched, which lead to the grant of a research
project on PEM membranes for 1,2 M
€
.
The funding criteria are the following :
•
general quality of the proposal
•
scientific quality
•
technological quality
•
valorisation (positive impact on the development of new products, processes and
services by Walloon companies)
Belgium
40
In the future, the Walloon Region will take a more co-ordinated and multi-annual
approach.
DGTRE tries to co-ordinate their programmes with the EU priorities in order to help
Walloon research units and companies participate in the European RTD.
Several measures are taken in favour of SME's in all fields of research. Public funding
of SME's granted research projects amounts to 70 % of the total cost of the project.
The other measures are described on point
4.4. Organisation of the NNE RTD in the
Walloon Region
.
Collaboration between universities and companies is encouraged by the demand that
results of the research projects are presented in such a way that they are applicable for
the development of new products, processes and services by Walloon companies.
Bulgaria
41
Country study Bulgaria
Bulgaria
43
Contents:
1
Summary of country study indicating main points for synergy
45
2
Main points for collaboration, synergy, complementarity with regard to the
NNE RTD ERA
45
2.1
Existing opportunities for ERA
45
2.2
Concrete possible policy actions
46
3
Short background information
46
3.1
The overall energy situation of Bulgaria
46
3.1.1
Distribution of energy sources
46
3.1.2
Imports/exports
47
3.1.3
Market concentration
47
3.2
The national RTDI system
48
3.2.1
Public/private spending on RTD
48
3.2.2
Main public research
48
3.2.3
Funding institutions
49
4
Brief description of NNE RTD research actors
51
5
Current NNE RTD priorities relevant for ERA in NNE RTD
52
6
Description of Priority setting process
52
Bulgaria
45
1
Summary of country study indicating main points for
synergy
Although Bulgaria overall economic situation has not allowed its accession in
European Union as a member State, Bulgarian non nuclear energy research and
technical development (NNE RTD) seems to be increasingly embedded in the
European Research Area (ERA). Bulgarian RTD excellence is in some fields
recognised within Europe, for example in electrochemical power sources and solar
energy : two research units have been recognised as European Centre of Excellence.
The government policy is notably oriented toward the support of these RTD fields,
with a special funding and evaluation role increasingly devoted to the National
Council for Scientific Research.
Bulgarian NNE RTD collaborations are mainly embedded within NATO and
UNESCO frameworks, and within European bilateral co-operations instead of
European Framework Programmes (FPs).
2
Main points for collaboration, synergy, complementarity
with regard to the NNE RTD ERA
2.1
Existing opportunities for ERA
During the last 10 years Bulgarian research units have had very active international
collaboration, within European Union mainly, but also within the programme Science
for Peace of NATO and UNESCO programmes. The collaborations intervened with
other universities and with foreign private companies. International collaboration with
companies is a necessity because Bulgarian firms are young and are still not investing
in research : the Bulgarian market for research exists barely not.
In their RTD international and European collaborations, Bulgarian researchers
encounter mainly language and funding problems – public RTD expenditures are low
in Bulgaria, even if the government tries to support internationally recognised
Bulgarian RTD units and researchers.
Bulgarian researchers are more oriented toward bilateral co-operation, through direct
contracts with another research institution : “bilateral structures of common research
between selected countries are important”, because “not everything has to be done by
the European Union” assessed the Director of CLEPS, the Bulgarian Academy of
Science Central Laboratory of Electrochemical Power Sources. For example this
laboratory had between 100 and 120 collaborations during the last 10 years, mainly
with Germany, the USA, Japan. Its European collaborations are only with western
countries (Germany, the UK, Greece, Spain, France…), and this last characteristic
seems to be common to many Bulgarian European collaborations.
International collaboration is presented as one of the main priorities of research
organisations, some institutes having recently set up a commission for European
integration, CLEPS for example. The importance of first steps toward co-operation
Bulgaria
46
through RTD projects is highlighted, for example common papers, professors
exchanges, visits, meetings.
2.2
Concrete possible policy actions
Improving mobility with associate countries has been one of the main preoccupation
of our interlocutors, and the only policy actions suggestion has been the extend of
Marie Curie fellowships to associate members.
3
Short background information
Bulgaria is a South-eastern Europe country, with a total land area of 110 550 square
kilometres, and circa 8 millions inhabitants. Bulgaria has had significant problems in
transitioning from a centrally-planned economic system to a market-based economy,
has encountered a continued recession in the industrial sector and has engaged a
radical restructuring of its economy.
Bulgaria will remain, with Romania and Turkey, an associate country of European
Union in 2004. Its entry in EU is planned in 2007, but it was invited to join the North
Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) in 2001.
3.1
The overall energy situation of Bulgaria
3.1.1
Distribution of energy sources
The major energy sources in Bulgaria are coal (34,1% in 2001), nuclear energy
(24,7%), oil (21,6%) and gas (15,3%). This energy mix is highly emitting greenhouse
gas.
Exhibit 3-1 Energy share of TPES in 2000
Source : IEA
Bulgaria’s electricity is generated from coal (50%), nuclear power (40%) and
hydropower (10%).
Bulgaria
47
3.1.2
Imports/exports
8
“Bulgaria depends largely on imports to meet its energy needs. The country has
virtually no oil reserves and extremely low amounts of natural gas deposits. Bulgaria
balances its dependence on international sources of energy with its strategic location,
which allows Bulgaria to serve as an integral transporter of energy from Russia to
South-eastern Europe and Turkey. Nevertheless, coal is one resource in relative
abundance in Bulgaria. Additionally, Bulgaria generates a surplus of electricity that is
exported south-westward to Turkey, Macedonia, Kosovo, former Yugoslavia and
Greece. (…)
More important than Bulgaria’s lack of oil and gas resources is its position as a non-
Bosporus channel for delivering Russian oil and natural gas. Bulgaria plans to
maximise its geographic location through the development of new pipeline routes.
Given concerns over the heavy traffic, economic viability and safety of the Bosporus
straits as a transportation channel, Bulgaria could solidify itself as an important
location for the transportation of oil and natural gas from Russia to South-eastern
Europe and Turkey.
Bulgaria’s most plentiful resource is low quality, brown lignite coal. However,
domestic consumption still exceeds production, requiring large amounts of coal
imports from the international market, particularly from the Ukraine. The Bulgarian
Energy Strategy calls for US$437 million investment in the coal sector to increase
production through refurbishing facilities and incorporating newer technologies.”
3.1.3
Market concentration
“The Bulgarian government initiated an energy sector liberalisation plan in the late
1990s. Much of the government’s effort is outlined in the Bulgarian Energy Strategy
2002, which calls for seven state-owned energy firms to be privatised by June 2003.
Currently, there are greater than 100 state-owned energy companies operating in
Bulgaria and the strategy finds that roughly 75% of them should be sold. A central
rationale for the liberalisation efforts underway in Bulgaria is to harmonise with
European Union (EU) energy sector reforms in preparation for Bulgarian accession.
Lawmakers modelled recent energy legislation around EU mandates, including:
unbundling monopolies, improving efficiency, attracting investment, and promoting
privatisation. For example, Bulgaria created an autonomous State Energy Regulatory
Commission, which has the authority to issue licenses and set price levels for
electricity, natural gas and district heating.
(…)
Liberalisation of the power sector began in 1998. Legislation unbundled generation,
transmission, and distribution of electricity from the national electricity firm, the
National Electric Company (NEK). In the process NEK lost purview over seven
generation units, seven distribution entities and the sole nuclear power plant
(Kozloduy). Bulgaria may lose its position as the electricity hub of the Balkan/South-
eastern Europe region in the near future, as 40% of generating capacity will be retired
by 2010.”
8
The following developments come from CEEBIC, the American Central Eastern Europe
Business Information Centre _
www.mac.doc.gov/ceebic/
Bulgaria
48
3.2
The national RTDI system
3.2.1
Public/private spending on RTD
Bulgarian total R&D expenditures are among the lowest in ERA countries : 0,6% of
GDP for the period 1996-2000 according to UNDP
9
. Private R&D expenditures are
very low, representing less than 5% of total R&D spending.
In 1996, R&D expenditures represented 20% of their level in 1989. According to the
Joint Research Centre, “the spending for research and development on enterprise level
was divorced from the demands of the market and followed a trend of rapid decline
(over 10 times for the 1989-1998 period).”
3.2.2
Main public research
The RTD system is composed of
•
universities
•
the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences (BAS) and the National Centre of Agrarian
Sciences (NCAS)
•
professional research institutes
The major part of public funding is given to the Academy of Sciences. The Academy
is well-embedded in international collaboration, having many centres of excellence in
mathematics, physics, biology and technology.
Some universities (Sofia, Varna…) are also important research poles.
Research organisations have introduced the notion of economic profitability in their
research activities. A larger share of their resources is now coming from contracts
with industry.
9
United Nations Development Programme
Bulgaria
49
Exhibit 3-2 Distribution of researchers among research organisations
70%
12%
10%
8%
Universities
Academy of Sciences
NCAS
Industrial units
Source : National Research Council
3.2.3
Funding institutions
The Exhibit 3-3 presents an overview of the Bulgarian R&D system.
Exhibit 3-3 Bulgarian R&D organisation
Adm. Relations
Fin. Relations
PARLIAMENT
GOVERNMENT
COMMISSION FOR
EDUCATION AND
SCIENCE
MINISTRY OF EDUCATION
AND SCIENCE
OTHER MINISTRIES
National Council for
Scientific Research
Applied Research
Institutes
University
Hospitals
BAS
NCAS
Universities
Technology Centres
Innovative
SMEs
Research centers
Laboratories
Institutes
I N D U S T R Y
Source : National Research Council
The Ministry of Education and Science funds 85% of research. Other ministries
(Economy ; Agriculture and Forest) have other special research programmes.
The Ministry of Education and Science is the supervision authority of all the research
organisations.
Bulgaria
50
Exhibit 3-4 Financial streams for R&D
5%
5%
15%
35%
40%
Direct subisdies
National programmes
European thematic programmes
Funds
Contracts with industry
Source : National Research Council
The government is progressively replacing the direct funding of research activities by
instruments more market-oriented, for example fiscal exonerations or new legislation.
Since 1990 the Ministry of Education and Science has been developing
•
the National Science Fund (see researchers and economic actors
•
), promoting research in fields where the Bulgarian excellence is internationally
recognised
•
the Structural and Technological Policy Fund, reinforcing interactions between
researchers and economic actors
Exhibit 3-5 The National Science Council
10
The National Science Council is a supportive and consultative body of Ministry of Education
and Science.
The NSC finances and supports implementation of scientific research, evaluates and results
thereby obtained, organises and promotes international collaboration.
It was established in 1990. Even during its infancy the NSC (then it was NSF- National
Science Fund) gained recognition as the one and only Bulgarian national institution financing
research. This period saw the restructuring of scientific research, and the transition from
institutional financing to direct project-based financing. The competitive principle projects
became the dominant fund-allocation principle for financing research instead of the
organisational financing principle formerly employed. Independent reviewing by outstanding
scientists using sound professional criteria was introduced.
For the period of its existence NSC considerably extended its international contacts,
participation in international projects.
10
www.minedu.government.bg/nsfb/Default-En.html
Bulgaria
51
4
Brief description of NNE RTD research actors
There is
no governmental programme toward NNE RTD
in Bulgaria, and as we
have previously seen, the Ministry of Education and Research policy is mainly
oriented toward innovation in companies and toward already existing RTD
competencies in public research institutions, especially internationally recognised
competencies.
The main actor of NNE RTD
11
is the
Bulgarian Academy of Science
, especially two
of its Institutes:
•
the Central Laboratory of Electrochemical Power Sources (CLEPS) : it was
founded 30 years ago and carries out fundamental and applied research,
technology and development projects, in the field of electrochemical power
sources: classical and valve-regulated lead-acid batteries; metal-air systems;
solid-state elements; Lithium-primary cells and secondary batteries. CLEPS also
conducts research in some new areas such as biosensors, information storage
technologies nanotechnologies, fuel cells, PV Concentration. CLEPS’ Portable
and Emergency Energy Sources (POEMES) is a European Centre of Excellence
•
the Central Laboratory of Solar Energy & New Energy Sources (SENES) : it was
founded in 1975 and is approved as a leader in photovoltaic researches in
Bulgaria. The unit is involved mainly in applied studies and projects in co-
operation with national and West-European partners. Research topics are focused
on :
−
photovoltaic materials preparation, photovoltaic device
−
design and simulations, solar thermal system design,
−
photometric and solar-metric measurements.
Other Institutes in the Academy are active in NNE RTD like
•
the Institute of Geology at the Bulgarian Academy of Science, in geothermal
energy
•
the Institute of Hydrology and Meteorology, in wind energy
•
the Institute of Water Problems, in hydro-energy
Universities
are also performing NNE research, in support to their teaching
activities :
•
in solar energy (photoelectric and photo-thermal conversion are the principal
technologies for utilisation of solar energy)
−
Technical University – Sofia: monitoring of photovoltaic systems, concentrators ; thermal
systems – design, monitoring.
−
Technical University – Gabrovo: monitoring of photovoltaic systems.
−
Technical University – Varna: monitoring of photovoltaic systems.
−
Southwestern University – Blagoevgrad: photovoltaic systems – application and monitoring.
−
Institute of Apply Physics at the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, Plovdiv – photocells.
−
Institute of Non-ferrous Metallurgy – Ltd., Plovdiv – fabrication of silicon .
−
National Institute of Hydrology and Meteorology at the Bulgarian Academy of Science –
measuring of solar radiation, simulation.
•
in biomass
11
We have not been able to collect information on coal, petroleum and hydro power RTD (except
regarding CLEPS)
Bulgaria
52
−
Agricultural University – Plovdiv: energy potential evaluation.
−
University of Forestry
– Sofia: energy potential evaluation for different kinds of biomass.
−
Technical University – Varna.
−
Technical University – Sofia: bio-diesel fuels.
−
Research Institute of Agriculture Mechanisation and Electrification
– Sofia: plant waste
combustion.
•
in geothermal energy
−
Technical University – Sofia: design and evaluation of thermal pumps, heat-exchangers and
thermal installations.
•
in wind energy
−
Sofia Energy Agency: investigation on wind energy potential.
•
in hydro-energy
−
Technical University – Sofia.
−
“Energoproject” Institute.
5
Current NNE RTD priorities relevant for ERA in NNE RTD
Photovoltaic and solar energy are involving many Bulgarian research organisations.
As the CLEPS (Central Laboratory of Electrochemical Power Sources) is one of the
leaders in Electrochemical Power Sources RTD, this thematic could also be
considered as relevant for ERA.
6
Description of Priority setting process
RTD priorities are mainly an internal process within research units. For example at
CLEPS priorities are defined by department leaders and approved by the scientific
council of the Institute.
European Framework Programmes are said to be very influent on the research
projects, according to the Director of CLEPS (Central Laboratory of Electrochemical
Power Sources). He is pushing his researchers to have international collaborations
because the funding amounts are bigger than the national ones.
The National Council/Fund for Scientific Research evaluates scientifically the
proposals. From our point of view, this is the main governmental interlocutor
regarding RTD matters. In an ERA perspective, this institution could be considered,
in the future, as the focal point for eventual priority settings.
Bulgaria
53
Annexe A
Acronyms
BAS
Bulgarian Academy of Sciences
CLEPS
Central Laboratory of Electrochemical Power Sources
ERA
European Research Area
EU
European Union
FP
Framework programme
GDP
Gross domestic product
NATO
North Atlantic Treaty Organisation
NNE
Non nuclear energy
NSC
National Science Council (i.e. NSF, National Science Fund, or
National Council for Scientific Research)
POEMES
Portable and Emergency Energy Sources
RTD
Research and technical development
SENES
Central Laboratory of Solar Energy & New Energy Sources
SME
Small and medium enterprise
TPES
Total primary energy supply
Cyprus
55
Country study Cyprus
Cyprus
57
Contents:
1
Summary of country study indicating main points for synergy
59
2
Main points for collaboration
60
2.1
Necessary conditions for making ERA happen
60
2.1.1
Good practices
60
2.1.2
Barriers to collaborations
60
2.2
Existing opportunities for ERA
60
2.2.1
Thematic complementarities / synergies
60
2.2.2
Institutional complementarities / synergies
60
2.2.3
Type of research
61
2.2.4
Opportunities for international co operations
61
2.3
Concrete possible policy actions
61
3
Short background information
62
3.1
The overall energy situation of Cyprus
62
3.1.1
Distribution of energy sources
62
3.1.2
Imports
62
3.1.3
Energy policy
62
3.1.4
Market concentration
63
3.2
The national RTDI system
63
3.2.1
RTD funding
63
3.2.2
Definition of research agenda
64
4
Brief description of NNE RTD organisation
64
4.1
Main actors (national and regional level)
64
4.2
Expected future evolution
65
5
Current NNE RTD priorities relevant for ERA in NNE RTD
65
6
Description of Priority setting process
66
6.1
Priority setting process
66
6.2
Incentives
66
6.3
Research evaluation
66
7
Sources
67
7.1
Contacts
67
7.2
Internet Web sites
67
7.3
Pdf documents
67
Cyprus
59
1
Summary of country study indicating main points for
synergy
Cyprus is highly dependant on energy imports, which are mainly oil products: in 1999
the cost of imported energy represented more than 70% of the country’s earnings
from domestic exports. 4.5% of its energy comes from renewable energy sources. The
Government is aware of the necessity to develop non nuclear energies in general. It
has formulated and is implementing a comprehensive energy policy, which contains
clear objectives of development of renewable sources of energy, with concrete
application measures.
So far
it has not considered Research and Technological Development as a
priority
. In the island, the amount spent in RTD is about 0.25% of the Gross
Domestic Product, half of it being financed directly by the government, 17% by the
business community, and the rest being financed by the University of Cyprus and
foreign sources of funding.
Nevertheless, during the last few years RTD activities in Cyprus have been
significantly expanding, mainly as a result of the establishment of the University of
Cyprus. Moreover, the participation of Cyprus in the Fifth Framework Programme for
Research, Technological Development and Demonstration Activities of the European
Union, is considered of utmost importance, as it plays a catalytic role to the expansion
of research activities and enables Cypriot scientists to create networks of co-operation
and interact with their European colleagues. Additionally, the increase of research
activities undertaken by a number of research organisations, in the public as well as in
the private sector, as well as the establishment of the Research Promotion Foundation
- an institute responsible for the co-ordination and support of research activities - has
also been important steps towards the promotion of RTD in Cyprus.
Given the recent participation of Cyprus to European programs, and the youth of its
only University, Cyprus organisations are not much engaged in European co
operations. The main country with which co operations take place is Greece, because
its characteristics are similar to Cyprus’ ones. The Ministry of Commerce and
Industry, which is the competent authority for energies issues set up the following
priority themes of research in terms of non nuclear energies.
•
Solar energy
•
Hydro energy
•
Wind energy. This last theme is exploratory research only.
Cyprus
60
2
Main points for collaboration
2.1
Necessary conditions for making ERA happen
2.1.1
Good practices
European equipments facilitate Cyprus research, since the country cannot afford to
buy expensive equipment.
2.1.2
Barriers to collaborations
Efforts to develop RTD activities are constrained by the small size of the Cyprus
economy. Its enterprises are small size companies often family run. This does not
favour the development of industrial research, because lots of small size companies
cannot afford to spend large amounts of funds in RTD.
Moreover, in a small country like Cyprus, where family firms compete among
themselves on the local market, there is no tradition of collaboration and trust, either
between companies or with the local R&D infrastructure.
Additionally, the University of Cyprus which was created in 1992 is very young, and
has a lack of experience in terms of collaborations.
2.2
Existing opportunities for ERA
2.2.1
Thematic complementarities / synergies
The Cyprus government is willing to explore the potential of renewable energy
sources of Cyprus. It deals mainly with solar energy, biomass and wind energy. As a
consequence any collaboration at an international level that would support these aims
would be favoured.
The national Contact Point for the 6
th
FP on Sustainable development, global change
and ecosystems explained that there were “many” RTD European collaborations in
the field of Non Nuclear Energies, but he could give no synthetic overview
information on that field. Examples of current approved projects given by the
National Contact Point for the FP6 were often demonstration projects, and the few
projects on applied research were on biomass, and combined heat themes.
As there are no car manufacturers in Cyprus, no RTD is undertaken between the
fields of transport and energy. Nevertheless, there are some work undertaken in RTD
in energy in the environment theme; Biomass is an example of such activity.
2.2.2
Institutional complementarities / synergies
Networks are promoted through the COST Programme, which has developed into one
of the largest frameworks for research co-operation in Europe. The Government has
constructed the necessary organizational structures and mechanisms for the promotion
of the participation of Cypriot scientists in the Programme.
Cyprus
61
There is a wish from the part of the government to set up institutional Research in
Cyprus, and it seems that this could be supported by an increase in funding from the
European Community according to the OPET contact.
2.2.3
Type of research
The type of the projects depends widely on opportunities. In general, Cyprus
organisations work on small size projects.
The increase in the business sector contribution to R&D spending is partly the result
of the participation of Cyprus in the 5th EU Framework Programme for RTD and the
increased amounts granted to businesses within the framework of the programmes to
finance research projects managed by the Research Promotion Foundation.
2.2.4
Opportunities for international co operations
Most collaborations are performed with Greece, and there has been some common
projects in the past gathering German and Israeli firms. Actually, neighbouring
countries such as Greece work in similar fields in the area of energy , and it is very
helpful to work with them, because it creates synergies according to Ioannis Chrysis
from the Applied Energy Centre.
Cyprus is promoting the participation of research institutes to European programs,
especially in the frame of Mediterranean revised policy (LIFE, AVICENNE, MED-
CAMPUS, etc.), from the INCO program, and from some other projects.
As for the mobility of researchers, the national Contact Point for the 6
th
FP on
Sustainable development, global change and ecosystems explained that there is a net
export of researchers who find better living conditions and work opportunities abroad.
The Research Promotion Foundation is in progress to implement an Internet portal
that would facilitate and advise on research mobility and research work opportunities
in Cyprus.
2.3
Concrete possible policy actions
An expert suggested to provide simplified applying information for European projects
to companies, in order to increase the participation of companies to European
projects. Actually, he found out that there are less companies financing and
performing research than public institutions.
It seems that Cyprus research entities feel they are far from the European decision
centres, and they are badly informed on what happens at the European level.
Therefore, the national Contact Point for the 6
th
FP on Sustainable development,
global change and ecosystems suggested that in order to foster the creation of the
European Research Area (ERA), and to improve the co operations in NNE RTD,
some further meetings should be implemented by the European Commission. It could
also be undertaken under the COST Program, under the European Science
Foundation, or under a pan European entity. This would develop networks further,
and ease communication with remote countries.
Cyprus
62
3
Short background information
3.1
The overall energy situation of Cyprus
3.1.1
Distribution of energy sources
The final energy consumption per capita in 1998 was 1.56 millions of Tones Oil
Equivalent (TOE)
12
. Cyprus does not have any indigenous fossil-fuel resources. It is
almost totally dependent on imported energy products, mainly crude oil and refined
products. Solar energy is the only indigenous source of energy in Cyprus. The
contribution of solar energy to the energy balance of the country is about 4.5%.
Solar energy is utilized extensively by households and hotels for the production of
hot water. Indeed, Cyprus is a leading country in installed solar collectors per
capita (0.86 m2 of solar collector per capita
13
).
Solar energy is also used in non-thermal applications. Photovoltaic cells are in
systematic use by the Cyprus Telecommunication Authority and the Cyprus Broad-
casting Corporation to power telecommunication receivers and transmitters in remote
areas. It is also important to note that the Electricity Authority of Cyprus is now
committed to purchasing electricity produced from renewable energy sources
at relatively high prices in order to boost the development of these sources.
The government has given no subsidies and the growth of solar energy industry is led
by market forces. This growth has been continuous, due to the profitability of solar
energy in the island.
3.1.2
Imports
The isolated energy system of the island
14
is almost totally dependent on imported
energy. In 1999 the cost of imported energy represented more than 70% of the
country’s earnings from domestic exports. In 1999 1.2 million toes of crude oil, 50%
of Primary Energy Supply (PES), and 1.2 million toes of refined products, 50% of
PES, were imported of which 35% were converted to electricity. The only other form
of conventional energy used in Cyprus is coal for cement production. Coal accounted
for 6% of PES in Cyprus in the same year. Between 1990 and 1999 gross inland
energy requirements increased at an average annual rate of 4% in line with GDP
growth for the period.
3.1.3
Energy policy
A comprehensive energy policy
In an effort to alleviate the energy dependency problem to the largest possible extent,
the Government of Cyprus has formulated and is implementing a comprehensive
energy policy. Its main objective is the reduction of the country’s dependence on
imported energy through rational use of energy, and the greatest possible exploitation
12
http://www.islandsonline.org/island2010/PDF/cyprus.pdf
13
Sun in Action, Altener, February 1996
14
http://www.islandsonline.org/opet/chania/folders/40_Chrysis.pdf
Cyprus
63
of renewable energy sources. In this framework a number of measures to promote the
use of renewable energy sources in Cyprus have been taken.
Main objectives
The main objectives of the country’s energy policy can be summarised as follows:
•
Security of supply
•
Meeting demand
•
Energy conservation
•
Development of renewable energy sources
•
Mitigation of energy consumption impacts on the environment
•
Harmonisation of the energy sector with the Acquis-Communautaire
Measures
The energy policy of the country will be supported by an Action Plan which should
be ready in 2004. On top of that, a number of measures have been taken, some of
which are:
•
the establishment of the Applied Energy Centre
•
the establishment of the Institute of Energy in 2000
•
the operation of grant Schemes
•
the national grid utility agreed to purchase electricity generated from renewable
energy sources
3.1.4
Market concentration
The Electricity Authority of Cyprus (EAC) is an independent, non-profit making
semi-government corporation aimed at exercising and performing functions relating
to the generation, transmission and distribution of electric energy in Cyprus.
As a consequence, there is a State monopoly of energy supply in Cyprus.
3.2
The national RTDI system
3.2.1
RTD funding
According to the European Commission, Cyprus suffers from a very low level of
R&D expenditure
15
(in 1999 it was 0.25 % of the GDP). By sector, the government
accounted for 49 % of this expenditure, the business sector for 20 % (14 % in 1998),
higher education institutions for 24 % and private non-profit institutions for 7 %. As
regards the sources of funding for R&D activities, 51 % was financed from the
government budget, 17 % from the business community (14 % in 1998) and the rest
from the University of Cyprus and sources from abroad.
It is worth noticing
16
that the lion’s share of Cypriot R&D funds have gone to
research in agriculture, leaving manufacturing industry with a very low level of
research funding. Indeed, it is a well established fact that manufacturing suffers from
relatively low levels of technological development, with little support from public
15
European Commission http://europa.eu.int/comm/enterprise/enterprise_policy/enlargement/cc-
best_directory/research/cyprus.htm
16
Cyprus 2002: EU accession, economic reform and innovation policy Dr. Bernard
Musyckhttp://www.eanpc.org/eanpc/pdfs/epi_2002201.pdf
Cyprus
64
research institutions and an over-reliance on imported technology in a “packaged”
form (purchase of machinery, licensing, etc.). According to Dr. Bernard Musyck, “in
this tourism-and-service-based economy, the “innovation framework” was not a real
concern”
4
.
3.2.2
Definition of research agenda
The planning Bureau defines and co ordinates all government interventions in favour
of research, as well as international co operations in that field. This governmental
agency defines the strategy, the objectives, and the policy measures that will be
needed to implement the strategy. It also provides direct financing to research
organisations, and prepares a proposal for a development plan. Additionally, the
Planning Bureau participates to committees related to RTD with the European
Commission, and for bilateral agreements. In order to implement the scientific and
technical policy, the planning Bureau works with the Research Promotion
Foundation.
The Research Promotion Foundation is a non profit independent institution created in
1996 and financed by the government. It is used as an interface with the scientific
community. The Research Promotion Foundation manages all activities related to
program financing and administration of European Programs such as the FP 6
th
.
The aim of both entities is to co ordinate and support scientific and technical research,
and is made though financial aids given to RTD projects and though the creation of
databases which are of interest for the scientific community.
4
Brief description of NNE RTD organisation
4.1
Main actors (national and regional level)
Applied Energy Centre; the Centre was established in 1986 to serve as the focal point
for all renewable efforts in the country. It oversees the implementation of the national
renewable energy program, the main aim of which is to bring viable renewable energy
technologies to a level of wide scale acceptance. Its main roles are to promote and
disseminate renewable energies. According to an OPET contact in Cyprus, working at
the Applied Energy Centre, there is currently no research on Non Nuclear Energies in
this organisation, although there has been some in the past.
Institute of Energy; the Institute was established in 2000. Its main aim is the
development and promotion of renewable energy sources and the dissemination of
financially viable energy technologies in Cyprus. It closely collaborates with the
Applied Energy Centre.
Agricultural Research Institute (ARI); it was founded in 1962 as a co-operative
venture of the Government of Cyprus, the United Nations Special Fund and the FAO.
In 1967, it became the responsibility of the Government and is entrusted with applied
agricultural research responsibilities. According to the OPET contact from the applied
Cyprus
65
Energy Centre, this entity is performing research in terms of greenhouses gases and
biomass.
University of Cyprus; it started operations in academic year 1992-93 with four
Schools (Humanities and Social Sciences; Pure and Applied Sciences; Economics and
Administration; Letters) and eleven Departments. The promotion of scientific
research is one of the major objectives of the University, which it pursues through a
large number of research projects, mainly in the fields of information technology,
environment, biotechnology, energy, archaeology, mathematics and statistics, physics
and chemistry, Greek studies, Turkish studies, economics and education.
Frederick Institute of Technology depends on the Ministry of Commerce and
Industry, and has some activities of RTD transfer. It does not performs research.
4.2
Expected future evolution
According to the OPET contact from the applied Energy Centre, Cyprus is very
dependant on imports of energy, and the government would therefore approve a
further development of Non Nuclear Energies such as solar, biomass, and wind
energies. The involvement of the government is further explained in the above
mentioned Action Plan.
5
Current NNE RTD priorities relevant for ERA in NNE RTD
According to the National Contact Point for the 6
th
FP on Sustainable development,
global change and ecosystems, most priorities in Non Nuclear RTD in Cyprus come
from the Ministry of Commerce and Industry, because it is the competent authority
for energies issues.
Current priorities in that field are to develop:
•
renewable energy sources
•
production of energy
•
hydrogen technologies
•
application of renewable energy sources in the industry
•
application of renewable energy sources in the agriculture sector
•
energy saving systems
The current priority themes of research are
•
solar energy
•
hydro energy
•
wind energy. This last theme is exploratory research only.
The National Contact Point for the FP6 on Sustainable development, global change
and ecosystems was unable to give the corresponding funds dedicated to each
priority, and which part of it would be dedicated to RTD. As a consequence, it is not
possible to assess the importance of these priorities.
Cyprus
66
6
Description of Priority setting process
6.1
Priority setting process
Scientific and technological research in Cyprus, is promoted through the annual
Programme of the Research Promotion Foundation for financing of research projects.
Within the framework of the first three calls, the programme supported a number of
topics defined in advance, which attracted a total of 259 proposals. Taking into
consideration the evaluation of the proposals, 50 of them are currently financed. The
available amount for financing proposals in 2000 was 1,2 millions Euros (0,5 and 0,8
million Euros in 1998 and 1999 respectively). The Foundation, which is an
independent organisation supported by the Government, is also responsible for the
management of the European research Programmes.
A permanent committee of advisers composed of representing persons from each
ministry, gathers to set up the priorities of the Research Promotion Foundation.
According to the National Contact Point for the 6
th
FP on Sustainable development,
global change and ecosystems there would be no public opinion push to increase
renewable energies.
6.2
Incentives
Two grant schemes are currently in operation, the first one provides financial
incentives in the form of governmental grants for the materialisation of investments in
the field of energy conservation and the substitution of conventional fuels with
renewable energy sources. The grant is set at 30% of total investment cost, with the
maximum amount of grant not exceeding 52000 Euro. Beneficiaries are existing
enterprises, which operate in the sectors of manufacturing industry, hotels and
agriculture. The second Scheme provides financial incentives for the installation of
plants for the treatment of animal manure, including anaerobic digesters.
6.3
Research evaluation
According to the OPET contact, the Cyprus Research Institute and the University of
Cyprus both elaborate yearly a report on what research was undertaken in their
organisation.
According to Dr. Bernard Musyck in Cyprus 2002: EU accession, economic reform
and innovation policy
17
, incentives which were made available, such as financial
grants for new technology, environmental protection or export of high tech products,
were never really evaluated.
This situation of low support activities is about to change, because a call for tender for
external evaluator are to evaluate all processes of the Research Promotion Foundation
and research programs. The government has also decided to ask for external advisers
to evaluate all the RTD administration system.
17
http://www.eanpc.org/eanpc/pdfs/epi_2002201.pdf
Cyprus
67
7
Sources
7.1
Contacts
Ioannis Chrysis, Applied Energy Centre
Dr. Kadis, National Contact Points for the 6th FP Sustainable development, global
change and ecosystems, Research Promotion Foundation
7.2
Internet Web sites
http://europa.eu.int/comm/enterprise/enterprise_policy/enlargement/cc-
best_directory/research/cyprus.htm
European Commission
http://www.research.org.cy/index.php?s=2
Research Promotion Foundation
http://www.eubuero.de/arbeitsbereiche/beitritt/isa/ncps/ncpcy
National Contact Points
for the 6th Framework Programme in Cyprus
7.3
Pdf documents
Dr. Musyckhttp, Bernard: Cyprus 2002: EU accession, economic reform and
innovation policy, Nicosia, 2002, Pdf.
http://www.eanpc.org/eanpc/pdfs/epi_2002201.pdf
Chryssis, Ioannis: Policy initiatives regarding res in the republic of Cyprus, Nicosia,
2001
http://www.islandsonline.org/opet/chania/folders/40_Chrysis.pdf
Chryssis, Ioannis: Large - Scale Utilization of Solar Energy in Cyprus, Nicosia,
http://www.islandsonline.org/island2010/PDF/cyprus.pdf
Czech Republic
69
Country study Czech Republic
Czech Republic
71
Contents:
1
Summary of country study indicating main points for synergy
73
2
Main points for collaboration, synergy, complementarity with regard to the
NNE RTD ERA
73
3
Short background information
74
3.1
The overall energy situation of the Czech Republic
74
3.1.1
Energy supply and energy production
74
3.1.2
Energy policy
76
3.2
The national RTDI system
77
3.2.1
Recent developments in strategic policy formulation
77
3.2.2
R&D expenditure
77
3.2.3
Institutional setting of the R&D system
80
4
Brief description of NNE RTD organisation
81
5
Current NNE RTD priorities relevant for ERA in NNE RTD
82
6
Description of Priority setting process
84
7
Documentation
84
Czech Republic
73
1
Summary of country study indicating main points for
synergy
The Czech Republic is a relatively small country with 10, 3 million inhabitants, and
makes part of the accession countries entering the European Union in 2004. Its energy
production is mainly based on brown coal and two nuclear power plants. Renewable
energy is marginal today, but shall increase according to the Czech Energy policy and
according to accession agreements with the European Union.
Even if some competent research institutes can be identified in the Czech Republic,
and the success rate of applicants to FP5 in energy research corresponds to the
European mean, it is rather limited in absolute terms, and covers most often applied
research.
The integration to the European Union and the European Research Area is perceived
by our Czech interlocutors as an important chance, impacting both on the research
system and on research in NNE, through the intensification of international exchange
and priorities given by the framework programmes.
International research collaboration and mobility of Czech partners is not limited to
European projects, but also happens on the basis of intra-institutional cooperation
agreements with universities abroad, notably in Austria, Germany or France. As it
holds for other accession countries, Czech contacts with the Visegrad countries are
very rare, some contacts exist with the Slovak Republic, with which it was a single
country (Czechoslovakia) until 1993.
2
Main points for collaboration, synergy, complementarity
with regard to the NNE RTD ERA
“We expect them to help us to find a better way” – This statement of one of our
interview partners concerning ERA and the role research policy has in the Czech
Republic seems representative for a very positive attitude, at least of the people we
could meet, towards their accession to the EU and their integration into ERA. Another
interview-partners stated that “there will be new options to increase research, as we
will be part of ERA. This will lead to the establishment of some research centres,
connected to other countries”. Due to the announced increase of the public budget for
research, “the research ministry will have money to support research in every
university”.
Due to missing data, no robust overview exists about international collaboration.
According to the head of an energy research department in a Czech university and
former member of the European Programme Committee, his institute collaborates
mostly with Czech partners as it is mainly based on Czech funds. On a bilateral level,
there exists a mobility agreement with the Technical University of Vienna in Austria,
that can support some small activities, outside FP6. An other partner is the Technical
University Dresden in Germany. Students mobility is also important and financed
Czech Republic
74
through Socrates. Mobility does not only go in one direction: students from France,
Austria, Germany or Turkey are also coming to the Czech university.
Collaboration is not limited to mobility, there is also some collaboration in research
outside the framework programmes. As our interview partner states, “it is not so easy
to penetrate FP6. We only have two projects FP6 in energy in our university”.
Bilateral collaboration is based on long term contacts, as for instance with French
universities. They concern common publications, the organisation of conferences,
participation in programme committees and so on, mostly in the field of applied
research and often with industry participation.
As it holds for other accession countries, Czech contacts with the Visegrad countries
are very rare, some contacts exist with the Slovak Republic, with which it was a
single country (Czechoslovakia) until 1993.
ERA is perceived as very efficient, notably concerning the possibility of
dissemination of results through workshops.
The weakness of the framework programmes from a Czech point of view is related to
the missing support of the participation of research organisation from accession
countries. One of our interview partners stated: “The main proposers are well known.
They have no reason to ask for new partners. Formerly, the participation of an
accession country was a plus point”. Another interlocutor said that “if you don’t have
pre-existing contacts, you have very little chance to become a partner, only with
extremely good results. Or you have already participated in a project…”.
The size of the FP6 projects is perceived as too big to be involved as project
coordinator. Even in FP5, there was no Czech project coordinator, but, according to
the Czech National Contact Point, “we tried to push people to coordinate. But this
does not make sense any more, the projects are too big. Projects have a bigger budget
than the budget of a Czech research department.”
The interview partners mentioned that it would be interesting
•
to know good practice in the organisation of energy research in other countries, to
invite some policy makers
•
to understand the flows and the evaluation of IPRs through practical presentations
with industry.
Concerning energy research it has to be beard in mind that it is more applied than
other topics.
3
Short background information
3.1
The overall energy situation of the Czech Republic
3.1.1
Energy supply and energy production
The Czech domestic energy production is dominated by coal production (85% in
1999), followed by nuclear energy. Other fossil fuels (gas and oil) are imported (see
Czech Republic
75
Exhibit 3-1 and Exhibit 3-2). In 1999, domestic energy production covered 51% of
TPES. According to the IEA report
18
, security of energy supply is an important
objective of Czech energy policy. Hydrocarbon imports have been diversified since
1996. The cost of energy imports represented 5% of GDP in 1998, a figure expected
to remain stable over the next decade.
Exhibit 3-1 Primary Energy Supply, 1973 to 2020
Source: IEA Country Report 2001
Exhibit 3-2 Energy Production by Fuel, 1973 to 2020
Source: IEA Country Report 2001
The growing share of natural gas in direct applications and district heating has
reduced the importance of brown coal, which still dominates in power generation. The
part of renewables in energy production is marginal but growing.
18
IEA: Energy Policies of IEA Countries, Czech Republic 2001 Report
Czech Republic
76
Energy transformation and consumption under the centrally-planned system exerted
considerable stress on the environment. Thanks to dedicated policies and investment,
performance has improved in terms of greenhouse gas emissions and pollutants
which, however, remain much higher than the average in OECD Europe
19
.
3.1.2
Energy policy
The energy situation inherited from half a century of central planning was
characterised by isolation from the international market, high energy intensity, heavy
dependence on solid fuels and dependence on hydrocarbon imports from COMECON
countries at politically-controlled prices. The Czech Republic has gradually reformed
its energy markets and opened them to international trade and competition without
experiencing supply disruptions. The government’s energy policy was embodied in
the 1994 Energy Act, which was largely consistent with basic policy objectives of the
European Union. It aims at diversification of energy supply through the development
of nuclear energy and new hydrocarbon imports.
In January 2000, a new “Energy Policy” paper was approved by the government. It
contained new objectives up to 2020, including the acquisition of reliable, safe and
environmentally-acceptable energy supplies to support economic competitiveness.
Based on this paper, a new Energy Act came into effect in January 2001.
The following basic objectives are respected in Czech energy policy:
•
Assurance of economically favourable use of domestic primary energy sources
•
Specification of public service obligations, or those in the general economic
interest
•
Achievement of accordance between economic and social development and
protection of the environment of the Czech Republic, its regions and localities
•
Gradual assurance of common objectives with the EU, including implementation
of legislation applicable for the energy sector.
•
Expansion of freedom for final customers to decide about the type or sources of
energy supplies and services
•
Creation of transparent and relatively stable material and legislative conditions for
effective management of business processes by energy and energy service
suppliers.
In the context of accession to the EU, the compliance with EU legislation is one of the
driving forces in Czech energy policy. The list of objectives cited above shows that
research and technological development don’t rank within the major policy
objectives.
On a more operational level, the Ministry of Industry and Trade has also developed a
“National Programme for the Energy Effective Management and the Utilisation of
Renewable and Secondary Sources of Energy” for a four years period, starting in
2000. Here as well, the “preferential domains of the implementation”
20
of the
19
See IEA: Energy Policies of IEA Countries, Czech Republic 2001 Report
20
- Integration of the energy efficiency objectives […] into other energy politics and programmes
- Enforcement of a support for the existing energy savings projects, measures and activities to
ensure their repetition and dissemination
- Support for the utilisation of renewable and secondary sources of energy.
See MIT, National Programme.
Czech Republic
77
programme don’t concern research or development objectives, but only
dissemination, even if some R&D projects have been supported, at least until 2002.
3.2
The national RTDI system
3.2.1
Recent developments in strategic policy formulation
21
In the first half of 1997 the Government adopted new Principles for Research and
Development. The Principles established both the system and the amount of State
support of research and development, legal regulations and all other documents in this
field pertaining to the forthcoming accession of the Czech Republic to the European
Union. One of the aims which the Government stipulated by these principles was to
increase - regularly and according to economic possibilities - the direct financial
support of research and development so that the support at the moment of the
accession of the Czech Republic into the European Union represents at least 0.7 % of
the gross domestic product. Another important step in fulfilling the new principles
was the formulation of the “Rules of Assessment of Research Intentions and Results
of Organisations for the Purpose of Provision of Institutional Support to Research and
Development”.
At the beginning of the year 2000 the Government adopted the “National Research
and Development Policy of the Czech Republic.” This proposal was prepared by the
Ministry of Education, Youth and Sport and the Council in the co-operation with
other bodies and institutions.
The same resolution by which the Government approved the “National Research and
Development Policy of the Czech Republic” also authorised the creation of two
independent new acts - one on research and development and the other on public
research institutions. The Government also decided upon the elaboration of the
proposal of the National Oriented Research Programme.
A new act on research and development, Act No. 130/2002 Coll., on State-Funded
Support of Research and Development and on the Amendment of Certain Related
Acts, was prepared by the Council in co-operation with the Ministry of Education,
Youth and Sport and a large number of other relevant bodies and institutions with
respect to the incoming accession of the Czech Republic to the European Union.
The act governs the system of research and development support from public funds,
public tenders in research and development, procedures of research intentions
assessment, the provision of information on research and development, and stipulates
the rights, obligations and assignments of bodies, authorities and institutions involved
in research and development. The act became effective on July 1, 2002.
3.2.2
R&D expenditure
The Gross Expenditure for R&D (GERD) amounts to some 1,35% of GDP
22
, out of
which a “smaller half” comes from the State budget, which in 2002 contributed by
0,59% GDP to GERD. The R&D system has undergone substantial changes since
21
This paragraph is based on Office of the Government of the Czech Republic: research and
Development Council, Prague 2003.
22
See : http://www.czechrtd.info, based on OECD
Czech Republic
78
1989, for instance a functioning system of grants and public tenders was set up: The
necessary reform of State financing of R&D was mainly focused on changing its
structure: financing realised via newly established grant agencies and tenders became
more and more important.
In the second half of THE nineties, the time dynamics of the Gross Domestic
Expenditure on R&D expenditures was positive (see Exhibit 3-3).
Exhibit 3-3 Comparison of the levels and time trends of the Gross
Expenditure on R&D (GERD) in the Czech Republic, EU-15 (average) and
OECD countries (average).
Source: http://www.czechrtd.info, based on OECD Science, Technology and Industry
Scoreboard 2001, Towards a knowledge-based economy.
The development of the amount of total State-funded research and development
support since 1993 is illustrated by Exhibit 3-4:
Czech Republic
79
Exhibit 3-4 Research and development support from the State Budget, 1993-
2003
Source: Office of the Government of the Czech Republic : Research and Development
Council, Prague, 2003
According to the Research and Development council,
“It is obvious from this figure that the amount of research and development support
from state funds expressed by the standard indicator (i.e., share of the GDP) had been
increasing only until 2000 when it reached the peak value during the existence of the
Czech Republic, 0.6 % of GDP. A slight decrease in 2001 and a substantial decrease
in 2002 was due to the fact that the Government and individual governmental
departments began to give preference to short-term measures with instant outcomes
over longer-term ones, research and development being among the latter. The
obligations of the Government both to the EU and to Czech society expressed by the
governmental resolutions thus were not fulfilled.”
In the Czech Republic a slight increase of total
R&D expenditures in private
sector
23
is apparent in the period 1995-1999. Even though the number is twice as
large as in Poland and Hungary, however it is half-size in comparison with the EU
countries average. The situation has not substantially improved in recent years. As a
result, the Czech Republic lags behind the EU and other developed countries with
regard to expenditures on private R&D. This adverse trend is confirmed by the results
of regular surveys conducted by the Confederation of Industry and Transport of the
Czech Republic which confirm that large and medium-sized enterprises in the Czech
Republic spend 1 to 2% of their annual revenues on research and development. In the
EU countries, private firms invest 4 to 10 % of their annual revenues in research and
development depending on the respective sector. Moreover, private enterprises in the
Czech Republic prefer short-term programmes and tasks expected to bring immediate
return of capital. More basic and long-term research is not established and financed.
This fact is caused by a number of reasons including practically non-existent indirect
support extended to private research and development.
23
This paragraph is based on Ministry of Education, Youth and Sport of the Czech Republic:
Analysis of previous trends and existing state of research and development in the Czech
Republic and a comparison with the situation abroad. Prague, May 2002
Czech Republic
80
In the Czech Republic the previous decrease in the
absolute number of persons
involved in R&D
24
(the total number of employees in R&D dropped from 106 000 in
1990 to less than 40 000 in 1994) has been arrested. Without the FTE adjustment (so
called labour force referred to in the sources) the number of persons involved in R&D
per 10 000 employees would be 44 in 1995 and 45 in 1996.
3.2.3
Institutional setting of the R&D system
Public research is executed in the Czech Republic by
•
20 public universities
•
More than 50 institutes of the Academy of Science
•
more than 50 other research institutes.
As it is shown in Exhibit 3-5, funding passes either by the State budget act or by the
R&D Council of the Government, and is then either accorded as institutional funding
to the Academy of Science and to universities, or through public tender, managed by
the Grant Agency of the CR to research institutes (university, Academy of Science,
other public institutes or private sector research).
24
See : http://www.czechrtd.info
Czech Republic
81
Exhibit 3-5 Scheme of the state support of R&D
Source: : http://www.czechrtd.info
4
Brief description of NNE RTD organisation
Through the interviews and written material, we couldn’t distinguish a clear “NNE-
RTD organisation” in the Czech Republic: Research in this field is mainly undertaken
in university institutes, some research in the field of biomass is also done in other
agricultural institutes, the Academy of Science seems less involved in NNE RTD. In
general, energy research is very oriented towards applied research, the Director of the
Energy Policy Department in the Czech Ministry of Industry even states that he
doesn’t know any field of energy that will be supported by extensive research, only
nuclear energy having some regular research base.
In terms of funding, programme specific funding either comes from the Czech Energy
Agency (CEA)
25
, who is executing the National programme for energy management,
or from the environmental fund. However, both of them are oriented towards
applications and not so much towards research.
Within the State programme for energy management, a part is support for the
development and use of state-of-the art technology and materials for increasing
25
http://www.ceacr.cz/?page=titulni_en
Czech Republic
82
energy efficiency. In 2002, subsidies amounting to CZK 1,365 million supported 5
projects in this area having a total cost of CZK 16,133 million. New products and
technologies are later applied in conservation projects. However, as it is shown in
Exhibit 4-1, this budget is less important than the previous one; a report on the 2003
funding indicates no more R1D projects but only demonstration projects in the field
of NNE.
Exhibit 4-1 Selected and supported R&D project of the National Programme,
2001, 2002.
2001
2002
Number of applications
9
Number of selected
projects
6
5
Total costs (CZK)
19 733 000
16 133 000
Provided subsidy (CZK)
4 552 000
1 365 000
Source: Czech Energy Agency
5
Current NNE RTD priorities relevant for ERA in NNE RTD
The transformation of the Czech research system during the last 1,5 decades had a
considerable impact on research priorities in this country: According to the Director
of the Energy Policy Department in the Czech Ministry of Industry,
“Research was very extensive in the past, but we had a shortage of financial means
for implementation. I worked for more than 20 years in the research sector, on
carbonisation. We had a lot of solutions, but they have never been implemented.
After the change, everybody was focussed on implementation by markets, which
means short-term income. If you speak about research, you speak about future, not of
immediate profit. Our new energy policy would like to stress this point, and attract
money for new technologies and methods helping to increase energy efficiency,
savings, and environmentally oriented technologies.”
Interviews undertaken in the Czech Republic clearly showed that European
integration is an important driving force for priority setting in research policy. For
instance, the recently started research programme has a similar structure as FP6.
Even if the country is member of the IEA, the IEA R&D database does not provide
data on the Czech Republic, so no quantitative analysis of research priorities can be
provided.
In terms of participation to FP5, Exhibit 5-1 shows that the success-rate of Czech
participation was highest in the Energy programme, but on a lower absolute level than
in the other programmes.
Czech Republic
83
Exhibit 5-1 Participation of the Czech Republic in the thematic programmes
of the F5 1999-2002
Source: Cejkova, Technology Centre AS CR.
In the domain of NNE, interview partners mentioned a potential for biomass and
some potential for wind, and of course a potential for clear coal energy conversion.
An assessment of Czech Republics RTD needs and capacities (see Annexe A)
identifies several fields with a high need, differentiating between high and low
capacity to respond to this need:
The following fields (technologies / processes / issues) are indicated as “high need
and high capacity”:
•
Combustion
•
Small scale combustion plants (< 100kW)
•
Policies, barriers
•
Environmental issues
•
Greenhouse gas and Kyoto related issues
Far more issues are indicated with “high need” and “low capacity”:
•
Co-combustion
•
Fixed bed gasification
•
Medium to large scale combustion systems (> 100 kW, < 5 MW)
•
Small scale CHP plants (>100 kWel, < 20 MWel)
•
Solid fuel upgrading from forestry and wood industry residues
•
Solid fuel upgrading from municipal solid waste
•
Solid fuel upgrading from agricultural residues
•
Solid fuel upgrading from agricultural dedicated crops
•
Combustion engines for gaseous fuels
•
Combustion engines for liquid fuels
Czech Republic
84
•
Fuel cells for gaseous fuels
•
Fuel cells for liquid fuels
•
Biomass potential and trade
•
Socio-economic issues
6
Description of Priority setting process
Recent policy papers on research policy have been presented under the heading 3.2.1.
The last version of the National Research Programme (NRP II) was approved by the
Czech Government on 28 April 2003. The first projects under this Programme are to
be launched in January 2004. It is for the first time based on a national foresight
exercise, conceived and organised by the Technology Centre AS CR in co-operation
with the Engineering Academy of the CR, both entrusted with the preparation of the
proposal of the National Research Programme.
According to our interview partner from the Technology Centre, this new Programme
will introduce substantial changes, as it resembles the competencies of different
domains under the prime responsibility of the Ministry of Education, whereas the
different technical ministries have been in charge for their domain specific research
before. In terms of content, “research should reflect the need of the Czech society”.
The foresight exercise seems to have worked well, basically as it could count on a
good selection of experts, but the results remain rather general then operational. A
web-page provides information on the exercise
26
, however, detailed information on
the research programme are only available in Czech.
Besides the national research programme and the definitions of priorities, the
integration in the European Research Area has also considerable weight in the
expectation on the development of the Czech research system: National Research
programmes do not refer to energy research, but the grant agency supports the
participation in EU programmes, so there is an obligation to fund energy research
corresponding to the part in the Framework Programme.
Programme evaluation is not yet very developed: the grant agency is in charge of
research statistics, but according to one of our interview partners from the
Technology Centre of the Academy of Science, these statistics are manly done on the
basis of expenditure, without an evaluation on a sector basis.
7
Documentation
Act of 25
th
October 2000 on energy management
CEA: Analysis of the Government Programme for the Support for Energy
Conservation and the Utilisation of Renewable Sources of Energy for the year
2001 – Part 1
26
http://www.foresight.cz
Czech Republic
85
CEA: Government Programme for the Support for Energy Conservation and the
Utilisation of Renewable Sources of Energy for the year 2001, 2003
IEA: Energy Policies of IEA Countries, Czech Republic 2001 Review
Cizek, Roman: Renewable energy situation Czech Republic, Presentation
Zeman, Jiri, Developing cost-Effective Biomass Project. Contribution to the 3
rd
ISBF, anagEnergy Workshop, Bratislava, February 4, 2003, SEVEn, o.p.s.,
Prague.
Cejkova, Jana: Information on the Czech research system. Presentation, Technology
Centre AS CR.
Office of the Government of the Czech Republic : Research and Development
Council, Prague, 2003
Ministry of Education, Youth and Sport of the Czech Republic: Analysis of previous
trends and existing state of research and development in the Czech Republic and a
comparison with the situation abroad. Prague, May 2002
Czech Republic
86
Annexe A
Assessment of Czech Republics RTD needs
and capacities
Need
Capacity
Need and capacitiy indication
High
Low
High
Low
Technologies/processes/issues
x
Combustion
x
x
Co-combustion
x
x
Fixed bed gasifcation
x
x
Fluid bed gasification
x
x
Flash pyrolysis liquid production
x
x
Flash pyrolysis liquid application
x
x
Small scale combustion plants (< 100kW)
x
x
Medium to large scale combustion systems (> 100 kW,
< 5 MW)
x
x
Small scale CHP plants (>100 kWel, < 20 MWel)
x
x
Medium to large scale CHP systems (> 100 kW, < 20
MWel)
x
x
Solid fuel upgrading from forestry and wood industry
residues
x
x
Solid fuel upgrading from municipal solid waste
x
x
Solid fuel upgrading from agricultural residues
x
x
Solid fuel upgrading from agricultural didcated crops
x
x
Ethanol production from starch biomass
x
x
Ethanol production from lignocellulosic biomass
x
x
Feed stock for biodiesel
x
x
Biodiesel producttion
x
x
Liquid fuels from synthesis gas
x
x
Liquid fuels through hydrothermal upgrading
x
x
Hydrogen from biogas ans synthesis gas
x
x
Anaerobic dicgestion of agricultural residues
x
x
Anaerobic dicgestion of food industry residues
x
x
Combustion engines for gaseous fuels
x
x
Combustion engines for liquid fuels
x
x
Fuel cells for gaseous fuels
x
x
Fuel cells for liquid fuels
x
x
Biomass potential and trade
x
x
Socio-economic issues
x
x
Policies, barriers
x
x
Environmental issues
x
x
Greenhouse gas and Kyoto related issues
x
x
Czech Republic
87
Annexe B
Goals to fulfil the EU electricity target ,
GWh
Generation in 2001
Generation in 2010
Wind
0.6
930
Small hydro
826
1 120
High hydro
1 165
1 165
Biomass
5.9
2 200
Geothermal
0
15
Photovoltaic
0
15
TOTAL
1 998
5 445
Source :
Cisek, Enviros
Annexe C
State budget expenditures on R&D 2001 –
2002, in thousands of CZK
Source: Cejkova, Technology Centre AS CR.
Conversion: 1000 CZK = 31,14 Euro at the 01.01.2002
Denmark
89
Country study Denmark
Denmark
91
Contents:
1
Summary of country study indicating main points for synergy
93
2
Main points for collaboration, synergy, complementarity with regard to the
NNE RTD ERA
94
3
Short background information on overall energy situation
94
4
National RTDI system
98
4.1
The Board of Danish Research Councils
98
4.2
The Six Research Councils
98
5
Brief description of NNE RTD organisation
102
5.1
Main actors
102
5.2
Expected future evolution
102
6
Current NNE RTD priorities relevant for ERA in NNE RTD
103
7
Description of Priority setting process
103
8
Information sources
104
Denmark
93
1
Summary of country study indicating main points for
synergy
Danish energy policy has for decades been characterised by the objectives of security
of supply and environmental energy system. In addition there has been a strong wish
to develop domestic industry based on energy technologies. Denmark has used
taxation and rather strong measures to reach these objectives. They can harvest from a
sector with domestic production of oil and gas, infrastructure for district heating and
natural gas, relatively low energy intensity, a remarkable development in wind
industry as well as a high share of wind power in the national supply.
Through liberalisation processes some of the measures are harmonised, but the main
objectives remain the same. R&D is a strong component of energy policy, and even
attracts political interest and debate. In 2003 a political agreement lead to increased
funding for energy R&D.
The R&D system has a strong sector perspective, although basic research is financed
by the Ministry of Science. All funds for applied energy research are handled by the
Energy Agency (EA). In addition power sector organise this sector’s R&D activities
based on approval by EA. The Research Agency (RA) is from now on going to
approve the scientific content of EA’s R&D allocations. This way a fragmented
energy R&D system is increasingly co-ordinated.
EA is in the process of developing a number of research strategies (PV, fuel cell,
wind etc.). These processes are organised by EA, but involve both industry and
research community. EA also has an Advisory Committee for Energy Research. The
strategies imply some priority, but still announcement of R&D grants are quite open
for proposals.
Participation in EU energy R&D is considered positive, but is not an important
criterion in the evaluation of proposals. Also there are very few initiatives or
measures to stimulate participation in EU programmes. RA can give support to the
development of proposals with Danish co-ordinators.
The priorities in FP6 are viewed as quite well in line with Danish priorities in energy
research. The general positions on EU research are developed by Ministry of Science,
whereas EA is following the energy-related programmes. A general critique of EU
activities is the bureaucracy and time consuming processes, as well as the priority of
large projects making it hard for SMEs to play a part.
The following issues are considered relevant for the further development of European
NNE R&D in Denmark.
From the EU side
•
Increased attention to how social sciences can play a role in the policy making and
public debate related to energy market liberalisation, energy and environment
issues and innovation based on energy developments could be an interesting use
Denmark
94
for the benefit of the whole EU and draw on important experiences from all the
Scandinavian countries
•
The EU NNE R&D needs a more prominent alternative to the dominant large
integrated projects to attract SME participation
•
Increased flexibility
From the Danish side
•
Development of a strategy on how to reach the general objective of increased
Danish participation in EU research.
•
Consider whether Danish legal systems allow a more flexible system of
instruments, like letting Danish funds go to foreign projects.
2
Main points for collaboration, synergy, complementarity
with regard to the NNE RTD ERA
Denmark has had a high project acceptance rate in previous FPs. In general,
objectives between EU NNE research and Danish energy R&D are shared to a high
extent. Both give high priority to renewable energy, efficient use of energy and the
industrial potential of new energy technologies. Also the challenges brought forward
by the liberalisation of energy markets are very much at hand for both. In Denmark a
R&D programme in social sciences were established early in the 90-ies.
The main Danish interests in the preparatory process of FP6 has been to keep up the
interest and financing of wind energy developments, and to underline the barriers felt
by SMEs facing the larger Integrated Projects of FP6.
At national level, participation in EU projects is generally seen as a positive aspect of
a proposal and of a research group. But supplementary national grants are not
automatically given to such projects. To some extent grants are given in the
preparatory stages of EU proposals, under the condition that the Danish part is having
a coordinating or leading role in the project.
The policy towards EU R&D programmes in general are developed and taken care of
in the Ministry of Research. Representation in programme committees on the energy
side is, however, taken care of by EA.
International co-operation in energy R&D mainly means EU programmes. Two other
organisations play an important role, namely:
•
IEA where Denmark takes an active role in the various Implementing Agreements
•
Nordic Council, where The Nordic Energy Research Programme is a significant
initiative to develop joint competence in relevant technologies. The programme is
now developing into a Nordic and Baltic Region programme.
3
Short background information on overall energy situation
The Danish primary energy production was 334 TWh (2002), of which 8.6 % came
from renewables and the rest from fossil fuels (oil and gas). Both wind energy and oil
production is increasing. The total energy consumption was 229 TWh and has been
Denmark
95
relatively stable over the last 20 years. In 1997 Denmark reached “self-sufficiency”
for the first time in modern times.
Energy consumption is dominated by coal in the production of electricity. Both
natural gas and wind energy (14 % in 2002) takes a growing share. In district heating
the role of coal and oil has been reduced by increased use of natural gas and
renewables, mostly bio energy.
The household and transport sectors are the largest energy consuming sectors
followed by industry, each of them around 20 % of total consumption.
Through an active policy, the Danish Government has reached the goal of self-
sufficiency. This has been possible by:
•
Increased offshore petroleum production
•
Development of infrastructure for natural gas and district heating, mostly in
separated areas
•
The development of wind energy and bio energy as domestic energy sources.
•
Strong focus on reduction of energy intensity in households and industry.
•
Significant taxation.
Figure 1
GDP, CO2 and energy consumption.
50
75
100
125
150
'90
'91
'92
'93
'94
'95
'96
'97
'98
'99
'00
'01
'02
GDP in Constant Prices
Gross Energy Consumption, Adjusted
CO2 Emissions, Adjusted
Energy Intensity
CO2 Intensity
Source: Danish Energy Authority,
http://www.ens.dk/graphics/Publikationer/Statistik_UK/uk2002_forl/Graphs_2002.ppt
Denmark
96
Figure 2
Heating in installations in households
Source for all graphs: Energy Statistics 2002, Danish Energy Authority,
http://www.ens.dk/graphics/Publikationer/Statistik_UK/uk2002_forl/Graphs_2002.ppt
Figure 3
Renewable energy and electricity production by type
Source for all graphs: Energy Statistics 2002, Danish Energy Authority,
http://www.ens.dk/graphics/Publikationer/Statistik_UK/uk2002_forl/Graphs_2002.ppt
Denmark
97
Figure 4
Final energy and electricity consumptions by sector
Source for all graphs: Energy Statistics 2002, Danish Energy Authority,
http://www.ens.dk/graphics/Publikationer/Statistik_UK/uk2002_forl/Graphs_2002.ppt
Figure 5
Energy prices for households 2002
Source: Energy Statistics 2002, Danish Energy Authority,
http://www.ens.dk/graphics/Publikationer/Statistik_UK/uk2002_forl/Graphs_2002.ppt
The supply of electricity, heating and gas is covered by a number of political
agreements. The political agreements are outlined on the underlying pages, divided
into electricity, heating and natural gas. There are some overlaps between the areas,
so some agreements can be found under more than one area. A number of the
agreements are implemented in legislation.
Since the first oil crisis in 1973, energy policy has occupied a relatively significant
position in the political debate in Denmark. The Danish Energy Authority was
Denmark
98
established in 1976, primarily as a reaction to the problem of security of supply, but
gradually the focus also was brought to bear on domestic energy production (North
Sea oil and gas, renewable energy etc.), on energy supply and distribution (the natural
gas grid, CHP etc.), and on energy savings (insulation, labeling schemes etc.). In
addition, international sustainability targets – not least reduction of CO2 emissions –
and economic considerations have had a significant role to play in recent years,
during which the Danish Energy Authority has administered, for example, subsidies
for energy savings and green energy taxes together with a liberalization of the
electricity and gas markets.
The long term policy objectives still comprise energy security and environmental
sustainability. This leads to more detailed objectives concerning effective use of
energy, increased renewable energy production, further development of domestic
petroleum resources and further liberalisation of energy markets.
The focus on industrial development is strong throughout the energy sector. Particular
interest is devoted to the wind energy industry, as well as petroleum production. In
2001 wind industry exported worth of 20 bill. DKK; 5 % of Denmark’s export, and
the industry employed 16 000 persons. But there are strong industries also in areas of
natural gas, other renewables and environmental technologies in general.
4
National RTDI system
The Ministry of Research is responsible for R&D policy and general funding of
research. The Danish Research Agency is their acting part in all matters related to
basic and long term research: basic funding for universities, a few R&D institutes like
Risø National Laboratory and a few programmes. The Danish Research Agency is an
independent institution and serves as the secretariats for The Board of Danish
Research Councils (Forum) and the six Danish Research Councils (SHF, SJVF, SNF,
SSF, SSVF, STVF) and different programme committees.
4.1
The Board of Danish Research Councils
The Board of The Danish Research Councils consists of 13 members, appointed by
the Minister for Science, Technology and Innovation. The Chairman and six other
members are appointed in their personal capacity while the six Danish research
councils each appoint one member. The Board of The Danish Research Councils
handles tasks of common interest and importance to the interdisciplinary and strategic
activities of the Danish research councils. The tasks include support for Danish
research and scientific advice on research issues.
4.2
The Six Research Councils
Each research council consists of 15 members, appointed by the Danish Minister for
Science, Technology and Innovation in their personal capacity. The six research
councils provide financial support to research activities and research training. Also
they provide advice especially to the Parliament, The Ministry of Science,
Technology and Innovation, other ministries, The Danish Research Council, public
and private institutions. The advice is given either in reply to requests or by making
statements on their own initiative.
Denmark
99
The organizations and functions of the research councils are determined by the
Danish legislation, most recently by the Act on research, advice etc. (1997).. This act
determines the total structure of the Danish advisory functions within the research
area.
Applied research is a sector responsibility, mostly handled in the sector agency under
the respective ministries.
Exhibit 4-1 How is Danish research financed and where is it conducted?
Source: Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation
http://www.videnskabsministeriet.dk/cgi-bin/doc-
show.cgi?doc_id=36806&leftmenu=NOEGLETAL
Exhibit 4-2 Actors in Danish public research?
Source: Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation,
http://www.videnskabsministeriet.dk/cgi-bin/doc-
show.cgi?doc_id=36806&leftmenu=NOEGLETAL
The policy toward EU FPs and other aspects are handled by the Ministry of Research,
in co-operation with the respective sector agencies.
Denmark
100
Denmark has had a steady increase in R&D spending as a percentage of GNP. I 2001
it had reached 2.2 %, as compared with Norway (1.7), Sweden (4.1), Finland (3.2)
and EU (1.8). The total volume was 31.8 bill. DKK, of which the public spendings
were 31 %. Of Governmental funds for R&D, the Research Councils’ share of the
funds was 7.8 %.
Exhibit 4-3 How much research is conducted in Denmark
Source: Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation
http://www.videnskabsministeriet.dk/cgi-bin/doc-
show.cgi?doc_id=36806&leftmenu=NOEGLETAL
Danish research has a high performance in terms of number of articles in international
scientific journals (142 per 100 000 capita in 1999), but is only slightly over the EU
average in number of domestic patent applications (30 per 100 000 capita in 1999).
Exhibit 4-4 Geographical distributions of research activities
Source: Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation,
http://www.videnskabsministeriet.dk/cgi-bin/doc-
show.cgi?doc_id=36806&leftmenu=NOEGLETAL
Denmark
101
The Danish Minister of research in 2003 proposed a “Knowledge Strategy”, taking
into consideration the challenges of the future society. In this strategy the conclusion
is that
Denmark has the potential to do well in the global knowledge economy although the
statistics also indicate that there is room for improvement in certain areas:
•
Danish research is in growth.
The total public and private expenditure on research
and development has been on the rise for the last ten years and has reached, as of
2001, a level of more than 2.4 per cent of Denmark’s GDP. Although this is above
the EU average, it is lower than other leading research nations.
•
The research and development effort in Danish business and industry is rising -
but from a moderate level.
Over a ten-year period, Danish business and industry
has steadily increased its expenditure on research and development. However,
Denmark continues to lag behind other leading countries in this field when
considering the business and industry community’s R&D expenditure compared
to GDP. Danish business and industry invests the equivalent of approximately 1.7
per cent of the GDP in research and development while business and industry in
so-called leading knowledge economies invest between 2 and 3 per cent.
Furthermore, Danish companies primarily focus on development work that has an
immediate commercial objective and to a lesser extent on basic and applied
research.
•
A few large - many small and medium-sized knowledge institutions.
The activities
in the Danish knowledge system are spread among a relatively large number of
knowledge institutions. According to international standards, most of the Danish
knowledge institutions are small.
•
The level of education in Denmark has greatly improved in the last 20 years.
In
Denmark, 27 per cent of the adult population has a higher education compared to
an OECD average of 23 per cent. On the other hand, only 18 per cent of a
generation of young adults in Denmark begins a university education, which is
slightly below the OECD average.
•
The majority of Danish business and industry is not particularly high-tech.
High-
technology companies in Denmark make up a modest share of Danish business
and industry’s total turnover and employment.
•
The number of entrepreneurs within the knowledge services and high-technology
industries in Denmark is rising.
From 1995 to 2000, the number of newly
established companies in Denmark increased from approximately 14,000 to just
under 19,000 a year.
•
There is a moderate level of interaction between companies and knowledge
institutions in Denmark.
Four out of ten Danish companies with more than ten
employees have conducted product or process innovation between the years 1998
and 2000. A few more than every tenth of these companies has directly involved a
Danish university or other public research institution in their innovation efforts.
•
IT usage is widespread in Denmark.
Denmark is the EU country where the
Internet is most widespread.
Challenges facing the Danish knowledge system
•
To improve the overall level of education and recruit highly qualified knowledge
workers for both private companies and knowledge institutions.
Denmark
102
•
To prepare Danish companies and knowledge institutions for a global knowledge
market with increasing competition for investments and knowledge work.
•
To create better conditions for growth for knowledge-based production
•
To increase investments in knowledge.
•
To convert Danish IT usage into increased efficiency, productivity and
competitive strength.
The strategy points at a number of initiatives to further develop the intellectual
capacity, the innovation capacity and the interaction between numerous actors in this
system.
5
Brief description of NNE RTD organisation
5.1
Main actors
In public energy research there are three main actors at the strategic level:
•
The research councils, represented by the Danish Research Agency under
Ministry of Research fund individual projects and broad energy-oriented
programmes with a basic and long term perspective.
•
The Danish Energy Authority is an Authority under the Ministry of Economic and
Business Affairs. It has a wide responsibility for energy policy and instruments,
including the organisation and co-ordination of energy R&D.
•
The system operators
ELTRA
and
ELKRAFTSYSTEM
grant subsidies to
research and development projects concerning environmentally-friendly
production of power and heat. ELFOR (distribution companies) has a similar
programme for R&D on systems for electricity consumption. These PSO
programmes are proposed and financed by industry, but need Government
approval.
The PSO programmes were established recently. However the Energy Authority (EA)
maintains a central coordinating role for all of the three actors. EA has an advisory
committee on energy research, giving advice on strategic level. In addition strategy
processes are currently under way for a number of themes and technology areas. This
is a process involving both industry and the R&D community.
At the R&D level, both universities, institutes and companies are active and eligible
for R&D funding. Important institutions are Risø National Laboratories with history
in nuclear energy research, Technical University of Denmark, Danish Centre of Gas
Technology, Danish Geological Survey and a number of universities.
5.2
Expected future evolution
Denmark has ambitious goals for its R&D policy. There are no indications of major
changes to the system. But increased co-ordination is expected between the actors.
Reference can be made to EA’s role towards the PSO programmes, and the newly
approved demand that Ministry of Research/Research Agency shall approve the
research content of proposals with the sector agencies.
Denmark
103
6
Current NNE RTD priorities relevant for ERA in NNE
RTD
Energy R&D funding grew during the late 90-ies to a level of 350 mill. DKK in 2001.
For the year 2002 the corresponding figure were approximately 150 mill. DKK,
tending to grow in 2003 (200 est.) and the near future. These figures include EA and
RA funding as well as the PSO programmes and correspond rather well with IEA
statistics.
Following the reduced funds, the support for petroleum R&D has been reduced to
near zero.
Important priorities in NNE R&D are:
•
Renewable energy in general, and in particular: Wind energy to maintain and
develop Danish competence and manufacturing industry.
•
In general support R&D with an innovation potential in Danish industry.
Examples being solar PV, fuel cells, hydrogen technologies.
7
Description of Priority setting process
Energy policy and even energy research attracts considerable political interest. In a
broad political agreement in the Parliament from 2003, increased funding for energy
research was one important result. Priorities within energy research happens to be a
political issues, but the current agreement lead to increased attention to long term
research and demonstration activities as well as increased funding.
The increase in funding came at a point when funding for energy research had been
radically reduced (2002), due to a wish to reduce Government spending and leaving
more of research to market actors.
The Government, through its ministries gives very little guidance on the priorities
within energy research. The EA gives priority to R&D leading to innovation and
industrial development, and increasingly so since EA in 2001 became subordinate to
The Ministry of Economic Affairs (previously Ministry of Environment). Industry is
involved in the priority setting in three ways:
•
Industrial parties take part in strategy development on energy R&D, cfr. Processes
on solar PV, fuel cells, wind energy etc. They are also represented in the Advisory
Committee for Energy Research and are in general widely involved in
consultations with EA.
•
The two PSO programmes are managed by the power transmission companies.
•
Industry is involved in R&D proposals.
The Advisory Committee for Energy Research does only play an advisory role. In
2002 the Committee gave its recommendations on future use of public funds for
energy research, some of which are:
•
Both industrial, environmental and energy sector needs underline the need for
continued support to energy research.
Denmark
104
•
Potential for improved coordination between institutions and programmes.
•
There is a need for a common vision and strategy.
•
Activities should be divided into short term (mainly industrial actors), medium
term (joint activities and networks between institutions and industry) and long
term (universities and institutes).
•
A national strategy should take account of the EU FP6 priorities and support
actors who can play a role at the European scene.
Under the Ministry of Research/RA, the quality of research is the dominating criteria,
and industry is not directly involved, except as proposers and occasionally by
individual experts.
Both EA and RA have quite open calls for proposals. Some guidance is given by
underlining themes and issues of particular relevance, but no issues are omitted. The
main priority process thus takes place when proposals are evaluated. EA involves
different experts within it’s own organisation, as well as external consultants, whereas
RA decisions are based on scientific expertise in the research councils and peer
reviews.
8
Information sources
Energy Agency:
http://www.ens.dk/
Research Agency:
http://www.forsk.dk/
Estonia
105
Country study Estonia
Estonia
107
Contents:
1
Summary of country study indicating main points for synergy
109
2
Main points for collaboration, synergy, complementarity with regard to the
NNE RTD ERA
111
3
Short background information
113
3.1
Overall energy situation
113
3.1.1
Exploration and reserves
113
3.1.2
Energy policy
116
3.2
National RTDI system
117
3.2.1
The national organization of research and development
117
3.2.2
R&D Policy
120
3.2.3
R&D Expenditure
120
3.2.4
Expected future evolution
121
4
Current NNE RTD priorities relevant for ERA in NNE RTD
122
5
Description of priority setting process
123
6
Sources / contacts
124
6.1
Organisations:
124
6.2
Other sources of information:
124
Estonia
109
1
Summary of country study indicating main points for
synergy
Estonia has been, and still is, in a process of thorough change through most sectors
since the fall of the Soviet Union. Both the energy and research sectors are radically
changed over a few years, and the accession process with the EU is both fuelling and
giving orientation.
One can distinguish two main characteristics of the last decade in the development of
Estonia’s science:
•
transition from being a part of a large country’s (USSR) science to the science of
a small country
•
hope for a full-scale entry to the new united space of European science
It could be considered that to a certain extent the Estonian science is already in
Europe by taking part in many common programmes and projects financed by the
European Union or by some Western European country. The EU, NATO and Western
countries provide financial support for the participation of Estonian scientists in
international conferences etc. Entry to the united space of European science implies
an idiomatic return to the model of Estonia’s science being part of a big science.
Energy research is not mentioned in the main overall R&D strategy. This may be
reflecting priorities and the country’s resource situation, but it may also be an effect
of the need to put aside issues which can wait. With a massive load of issues to handle
it is understandable that the public administration can not develop long term strategies
in all areas. However, an energy R&D strategy is being prepared and is expected to be
ready in a year.
As an accession country, Estonia has already had access to the EU R&D programmes
for some time. This has opened a broad range of new co-operative possibilities. With
a rather weak national energy research base, invitations to participate in European
programmes and a national fee for participation which is related to GDP, the actors in
this field have an obvious interest in becoming an active partner in the EU R&D
projects.
There are no formal obstacles to an increased R&D co-operation. Indeed, partly
prompted by the European Commission’s initiative to establish a common European
Research Area and by several international R&D programmes, Estonia has started to
revise the priorities of its national R&D and innovation policy and to strengthen its
resource base through international cooperation. Since the fall of the Soviet Union,
the whole R&D system has changed from what was an integral part of the USSR
scientific system, to an open system with financing principles of the western world.
The Organisation of Research and Development Act
is the main law regulating the
organisation of research and development in Estonia. This document entered into
force in May 1997 and was amended in 2002.
In spite of this open situation, there are a number of more practical obstacles to the
development of science in general and in particular international co-operation:
Estonia
110
•
Lack of national financial resources for R&D
•
Lack of scientific personnel and a challenging age structure for active scientists
•
Innovation capacity and competence in the industry and the public in general
•
Weak national strategy for R&D as a measure for development
This situation leaves priorities to a large extent to the actors and the sum of their
efforts. Both sector ministries, R&D institutions, industry and a number of scientists
take an active role. Not the least important for the total activity are the possibilities
generated through foreign finance sources, both bilateral and multilateral.
The Ministry of Economic Affairs and Communication is responsible for energy
policy and for funding of applied research and innovation. The Ministry is showing
increased willingness to take responsibility for energy research, and is currently
preparing an energy R&D strategy. As the development of the strategy is on an early
stage, the outcome is still unknown. However, the Ministry has proposed oil shale,
renewable energy sources, fuel cells and hydrogen technology as possible priority
areas in the future.
Other R&D matters are “left with” the Ministry of Education and Science and the
Estonian Science Foundation. Energy R&D is not an area with particular attention,
although energy projects have received funding. Over the last years, research has been
conducted in the areas of:
•
Renewable energy resources and their application
•
Energy efficiency in power plants and industry
•
Environmental-friendly use of oil shale
•
New and improved energy sources
Other priorities have been: energy storage devices, reliability of energy supply,
environmental friendly transport and harmonisation with EU energy politics. With a
possible exception of oil shale, the priorities and the challenges of the energy sector
of Estonia, is well within the current priorities of FP6. EU activities in the fields of
renewables, rational use of energy and social research related to market mechanisms,
regulation etc. will probably attract interest from Estonian groups. The same is
definitely the case for EU mechanisms to transfer technologies and R&D results to
SMEs and other users. Innovation has high priority in Estonia, and the state owned
organisation Estonia Enterprise has been established to facilitate research and
innovation.
The move towards larger integrated project in the FPs makes it almost impossible for
Estonian parties to take a leading role in projects. On the other hand, this has made it
easier for Estonian parties to come inside a project as a “follower” who does not have
to take a leading role in the development of projects.
Estonia will probably also in the future seek finances and cooperation through a
number of international channels, but co-operation through ERA will be dominating.
To facilitate further co-operation in the field of non nuclear energy research, and the
utilisation of R&D results, the following measures could be beneficial:
On the Estonian side:
Estonia
111
•
Strategic process involving both Government, industry and research institutions
to identify strongholds in energy research and areas where R&D is needed.
Further; possible steps to develop national clusters of international competitive
companies and R&D groups.
•
Financial mechanisms to ensure that good projects can meet the requirement of
national (own) financing.
On the EU side:
•
Flexibility in the requirements of financial contributions from project partners
from Estonia for a period would facilitate the participation.
•
General measures dedicated to stimulate Estonian parties’ (probably most
accession countries) participation.
•
All EU countries face a number of challenges following the liberalisation
processes in the energy sector, but the East European countries most. Increased
attention to (mostly social) science as a measure to develop policies, innovation
etc. would be beneficial to all and facilitate the integration processes.
•
A mechanism for transfer of experiences, and possibly the development of new –
in the integration of policy making of energy and R&D sectors. Even if this is an
East European issue, most countries find it difficult to have the right balance
between the two.
•
Facilitate countries with R&D issues in common, but issues which do not reach
the community level, to develop co-operative mechanisms. Example: Peat, district
heating.
2
Main points for collaboration, synergy, complementarity
with regard to the NNE RTD ERA
Many sources speak of a lack of national priority process related to NNE RTD. This
leading priorities to be set mainly by researchers in the extent they are able to find
financial resources to cover their expenses. This leads to scientific quality being an
important parameter in the priority setting, as well as finance institution’s (often
foreign) priorities.
As a national policy on energy research does not yet exist, the synergy and
complementarity towards EU NNE RTD should be judged by the characteristics of
the national research system in this area and the general challenges of the energy
sector of Estonia.
In terms of energy resources and energy policies to exploit these, Estonia’s position
fits quite well with the current priorities of EU RTD: The development of renewables,
increased efficiency throughout the energy system and issues related to deregulation
are important on both sides. In these areas there is in general a thematic synergy in
common R&D. Potential synergy is also present, but not so obvious based on today’s
priorities in EU FPs, when it comes to the further exploitation of Estonia’s oil shale
resources. As oil shale research fits in with the objectives of the research fund for coal
and steel, it is agreed between Estonia and the EU that oil shale is included in this
research fund, thus creating the room for new mechanisms for international co-
operation.
Estonia
112
Estonia has given high priority to the establishment of an innovation policy. In this
area it is anticipated that a number of East European countries face the same
challenge of education, change of general attitudes concerning competition etc.,
financing mechanisms etc. Although the general objective of letting R&D generate
business development is shared throughout Europe, it could be that the accession
countries, for a period, need special mechanisms in this area.
Estonia has a strong drive to international co-operation, and this is oriented to western
countries. Surprisingly little is left of contacts and cooperative activity with Russian
parties. The western orientation has also included co-operation with the US. It is
anticipated that this will go further, but that EU activities will be the most extensive
and not leave much capacity to develop other relations.
With a weak base of national energy research and limited capacity in terms of both
personnel and funding, there is a strong need of defining some priority areas. This
should be done on the basis of:
•
Fields with strong scientific competence
•
Industry’s priorities and potential co-operation
•
Government’s long term policy objectives
•
Areas with the need for domestic competence; either because the problem is a
Estonia-specific one or because it is considered vital to have national competence.
Probably other accession countries face the same situation. If the Commission could
facilitate this process through co-operation or parallel processes in a number of
countries, this could be beneficial to all.
The financial requirements to parties of RTD contracts are an important obstacle,
because of the present lack of funds in Estonia. The priority of integration in the EU
with an agreed national fee for participation in FPs has presently the effect that
national R&D funding is even more scarce. This problem of finance needs special
attention both at national and EU level.
The liberalisation process of the energy sector is challenging to all European
countries, but no doubt mostly to the East-European ones. A program to let social
sciences develop the policy making processes of all countries could be an interesting
initiative, both to facilitate the liberalisation, but also the integration between
countries. In Scandinavia, there are interesting examples of social science R&D
programmes with the objective of improved policy making and public debate in the
energy sector.
Potential interesting initiatives for increased synergy and complementarity:
On the Estonian side:
•
Strategic process involving both Government, industry and research institutions
to identify strongholds in energy research and areas where R&D is needed.
Further; possible steps to develop national clusters of international competitive
companies and R&D groups.
Estonia
113
•
Financial mechanisms to ensure that good projects can meet the requirement of
national (own) financing.
On the EU side:
•
Flexibility in the requirements of financial contributions from project partners
from Estonia for a period would facilitate the participation.
•
General measures dedicated to stimulate Estonian parties’ (probably most
accession countries) participation.
•
All EU countries face a number of challenges following the liberalisation
processes in the energy sector, but the East European countries most. Increased
attention to (mostly social) science as a measure to develop policies, innovation
etc. would be beneficial to all and facilitate the integration processes
•
A mechanism for transfer of experiences, and possibly the development of new –
in the integration of policy making of energy and R&D sectors. Even if this is an
East European issue, most countries find it difficult to have the right balance
between the two.
•
Facilitate countries with R&D issues in common, but issues which do not reach
the community level, to develop co-operative mechanisms. Example: Peat, district
heating.
In their attempts to participate in European R&D programmes, Estonia as well as the
other Central and Eastern European countries has faced a number of problems. A
survey carried out within the framework of the Ideal-ist project brings out the
following points as the main obstacles:
•
many potential participants in R&D projects fail to see the logic behind
competitive programmes aimed at solving specific socio-economic problems; on
the other hand, it is extremely difficult to plan a successful project if one has a
limited understanding of the rules;
•
due to the weakness of the liaison network, finding suitable strategic partners for
successful launching of projects is often a major problem;
•
having little experience and only limited knowledge of the world market, it is
extremely complicated to plan application schemes and business strategies for
projects whose scale is much broader than one is accustomed to.
3
Short background information
3.1
Overall energy situation
3.1.1
Exploration and reserves
Estonia is unique among nations in its heavy use of oil shale. Oil shale (Kukersite)
has been a major source of energy in Estonia for many decades, and is Estonia's
primary mineral resource. Estonia accounts for about 70% of the world's oil shale
production.
There is also some use of peat and wood waste as fuel at small heating plants. Estonia
has a reserve of 929 million metric tons of peat.
Estonia
114
Small hydroelectric power plants serve some villages.
Supply and Consumption
Exhibit 3-1 shows consumption of primary energy from 1991 – 2000. It reflects the
overall pattern of economic outlook, emphasizing the sharp fall in economy at the
beginning of the period and a stabilization period (1994-1996). Since 1996 it is
possible to detect a moderate, but constant decrease of consumption of primary
energy, although the economy itself has been growing.
Exhibit 3-1 Consumption of primary energy by source [TWh/year], Estonia
1991 – 2000
1.
Consumption of Primary Energy by Source
0.00
20.00
40.00
60.00
80.00
100.00
120.00
1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000
TWh/year
Gas
Motor fuels
Fuel oils
Coal and coke
Wood
Peat
Oil shale
Source: “Estonian Energy 1991-2000”, Ministry of Economic Affairs and Communication,
2001
Estonia produces no significant amounts of coal, oil, or natural gas. Natural gas and
petroleum products are imported. Estonia does not currently have any physical
connections with the electricity and natural gas networks of the EU member states,
but the country will soon be connected to Finland through a new cable.
Estonia
115
Exhibit 3-2 Consumption of primary energy, national resources and imports
[TWh/year]
Consumption of Primary Energy
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995 1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
TWh/year
National resources
Total imports
Source: “Estonian Energy 1991-2000”, Ministry of Economic Affairs and Communication,
2001
Estonian production of electricity is predominantly from its oil-shale-fired power
plants. Estonia has an electric power plant capacity of 2,722 MWe. Production and
consumption of electricity has fallen significantly since 1991. The main reasons are
overall fall in industrial output and a sharp contraction of the export market, resulting
from economic restructuring. Exhibit 3-3 shows end consumption of electricity by
sectors.
Exhibit 3-3 End consumption of electricity in economic sectors, TWh/year
0,000
0,500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
3,500
4,000
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
TWh per annum
Industry
Agriculture
Households
Public service sector
Source: Report “Estonian Energy 1991-2000”, Ministry of Economic Affairs and
Communication, 2001
Estonia
116
In ten years, the production of thermal heat has fallen by half, stabilising at around 10
TWh. Heat production generally means district heating, which represents around 94%
of end-consumption of heat. Although the use of different types of fuels in producing
heat directly depends on world fuel prices, the popularity of so-called clean fuels has
been increasing. Foreign assistance has played a major role in completing the
transition to the use of local fuels. The importance of oil shale and natural gas has
remained largely unchanged. At the same time the volume of fuel oil has been falling,
while biofuel and peat have been increasing strongly. At present around 25 percent of
the heat is produced as combined production of heat and electricity.
Total consumption of heat fell from 24.7 TWh in 1991 to 8.1 TWh in 2000, or about
three times.
Exhibit 3-4 End consumption of heat in different economic branches, TWh/year
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
TWh per annum
Industry
Building
Agriculture
Households
Public service sector
cc
Source: “Estonian Energy 1991-2000”, Ministry of Economic Affairs and Communication,
2001
3.1.2
Energy policy
2.
On 12 June 1995 the European Communities, their Member States and the
Republic of Estonia signed the association agreement (so-called Europe Agreement)
which was ratified on 1 August 1995. Under this agreement, Estonia assumed
political and legislative obligation to harmonize its legislation with the EU law and its
principles. Until now energy has been one of the five accession negotiation chapters
in which Estonia has applied for a transition period. In this chapter the biggest
problem was providing a 90-day reserve for liquid fuel. In its position Estonia has
requested that full compliance with EU requirements be delayed until 2010. Full
compliance with the internal market directive on electricity is not possible until
Estonia is linked over transmission lines with the EU. A similar situation is in the
natural gas market in Estonia. Other chapters that have a profound impact on the
development of energy sector are taxation of fuels and energy which is harmonized
under the financial chapter.
Estonia
117
3.
The EU has been pressuring Estonia to reduce shale oil use due to
environmental concerns. Estonia requested that the EU consider oil shale the same
way it does coal, and the request was granted in July 2002. This enabled Estonia to
close out the energy chapter in its accession negotiations with the EU.
The Estonian Government is giving high priority to its energy sector in its ongoing
economic reform program. Government policy and objectives toward its energy
sector can be summarized in two ways: to provide a reliable source of energy for the
country, and to provide such energy at the lowest possible cost. The chosen means for
accomplishing these include improving the efficiency in use of energy, improving the
overall reliability of electricity generation and distribution, attracting investment
capital where such capital can help finance needed infrastructure improvements, and
allowing competition and diversity into areas where state-owned monopolies exist.
The Long-term National Development Plan for the Estonian Fuel and Energy Sector
sets the main goals for Estonian energy strategy to 2005, and with principal
development trends to 2018. This document provided two important reference
figures: to increase the importance of renewable energy sources by two-thirds until
2010 in comparison with 1996, and, secondly, to reduce the importance of oil shale as
fossil fuel in primary energy supply in average by 20 percent (as a reference, from 62
percent to 47-50 percent).
Other energy related strategies include the
Energy Conservation Target Programme
(aim: ensuring energy quality) and the
Action Plan for the Restructuring of Estonian
Oil Shale Energy
(aim: self supply of primary energy)
.
Estonian National Environmental Strategy has set an aim to reduce negative
environmental impact of energy sector, to orientate the energy policy on the
technological development and use of renewable resources, to reduce the generation
of the greenhouse gases and to internalise the external costs of the energy production
and consumption into the price of energy.
The Estonian Riigikogu ratified the membership in the Energy Charter Treaty in
1998. The Energy Charter Treaty is a multilateral international agreement focussing
on the energy sector. It includes several agreements and protocols and one of the most
important is the protocol on energy efficiency and on related environmental issues
that lays down obligations for energy efficiency and for environmental aspects.
Provisions brought in the protocol are mandatory for member states.
3.2
National RTDI system
3.2.1
The national organization of research and development
The Organisation of Research and Development Act
is the main law regulating the
organisation of research and development in Estonia. This document entered into
force in May 1997 and was amended in 2002. As seen in Exhibit 3-5, the
Riigikogu
and the
Government
represent the highest level in the innovation system, with
legislative and executive powers respectively. At this level, state budget for RTDI
Estonia
118
activities is decided as separate budget lines for the different ministries and streams of
funding.
Exhibit 3-5 Organization of Estonian research & development and innovation
Source: “Knowledge-based Estonia. Estonian Research and Development Strategy 2002 –
2006”, Research and Development Council, 2002.
The Research and Development Council (TAN)
is a strategy advisory body for the
Government in the entire field of RD&I. According to the Organisation of Research
and Development Act, the Research and Development Council has 12 members and
its composition is confirmed by the Government for a period of up to three years.
Two ministries are primarily involved in financing (and formulating and
implementing of research policies) RDTI; the Ministry of Education and the Ministry
of Economic Affairs and Communication. With their responsibilities as specified by
the law, the division of the RTDI funding in two distinctive parts is apparent:
The Ministry of Education
is responsible for the organisation of research and
education policy and for the financing of R&D at research and development
institutions.
The Ministry of Economic Affairs and Communication
has a central role in
organizing technological development and innovation on state level, being
responsible for the planning, coordination, execution and surveillance of the policies
for technology and innovation. The Energy Department within the Ministry of
Economic Affairs and Communications
is responsible for energy policy issues, including energy efficiency.
The executive agencies of the two main ministries are
the Estonian Research
Foundation (ETF)
and
the Estonian Technology Agency (ESTAG).
The main task
of the Estonian Research Foundation (ETF), which functions under the jurisdiction of
Estonia
119
the Ministry of Education, is to support research projects by means of the allocation
of grants. The task of the Estonian Technology Agency (ESTAG) is to support
technological development projects within enterprises and market-oriented research
projects in research and development institutions.
Institutions advising the Ministry of Education in research and educational issues
include the
Estonian Academy of Sciences
and the
Research Competency Council
(TKN).
The Ministry of Education is assisted in carrying out its research and development
functions by the
Archimedes Foundation
which organizes evaluations of Estonian
higher education and research and acts as the national contact point for the EU’s 6th
Framework Programme.
Enterprise Estonia
was founded by the Ministry of Economic Affairs in the year
2000 with the aim of promoting the competitiveness of the Estonian entrepreneurial
environment and businesses. Future grants to energy R&D is likely to be allocated by
this organisation.
Historically, energy research has been concentrated at Tallinn Technical University
(Faculty of Power Engineering) and Academy of Sciences (Energy Research
Institute). In 2002, the Energy Research Institute became a part of TTU. Furthermore,
some energy research is being conducted by the Estonian Agriculture Institute (Dept.
of Agricultural energetics), the University of Tartu and a few smaller institutions.
As a consequence of the Soviet research policy the majority of research institutions
were separated from the higher education system. This isolation did not augur well for
the development of strong links between research and higher education. One of the
major tasks of the research policy over the past years has been to eliminate this
isolationism and for this reason the Ministry of Education and Science is now
realizing the integration and incorporation of individual state research institutes and
their staff into universities with the primary aim of modernizing and strengthening the
research capacity of these universities. Changes of structural reform of Estonian
science institutions can be see the figure below.
Exhibit 3-6 Researchers by sector 1995 – 2000
Source: Estonian Union of Scientists, http://www.iiss.ee/etl/world/index.html
The number of scientific personnel was dramatically reduced during the first years of
independence, but stabilized in the mid-90s.
Estonia
120
Exhibit 3-7 R&D Staff, 1990 – 2000
Source: Estonian Union of Scientists, http://www.iiss.ee/etl/world/index.html
3.2.2
R&D Policy
The overall Estonian R&D strategy (Knowledge based Estonia – Estonian R&D
strategy 2002-2006) was prepared by a working group with participation from the
Ministry of Education, Ministry of Economic Affairs and the Estonian Academy of
Sciences and approved by Parliament in 2001. Key areas specified are information
society technologies, biomedicine, and materials and nanotechnologies.
A new energy research strategy is being prepared by Ministry of Economy and
Communication. For now, the energy strategy from 1998 is still valid.
3.2.3
R&D Expenditure
According to the Organisation of Research and Development Act, research and
development in Estonia is financed ‘…from the state budget, a city or rural
municipality budget, endowments, income from the economic activities of research
and development institutions, and other sources.’
The level of RDTI funding in Estonia has been stable at about 0.6% of GDP for the
last years, but as the GDP has been increasing, so has the amount of R&D funding.
Total expenditure on Estonian R&D in 2001 comprised 0.75% of GDP. As seen in
figure 3.8, the State Budget is the dominating source of finance for Estonian research.
Exhibit 3-8 Total R&D financing in Estonia [mill. EEK].
Source: Estonian Union of Scientists, http://www.iiss.ee/etl/world/index.html
Estonia
121
Exhibit 3-9 Expenditures by kind of R&D activity, 1992 - 1999 [mill. EEK]
Source: Estonian Union of Scientists, http://www.iiss.ee/etl/world/index.html
There are no direct financing for energy R&D. The only programme on the energy
field that has (relatively small) state financing is the Energy Conservation
Programme. The research activities are all grant-based. The last years, energy
research has been financed through the “general national science grants”, which is the
responsibility of the Ministry of Education and Science. In 2003, the financing by the
Ministry of Education and Science amounted to EEK 184 million (about 11,5 mill
Euro). The share of energy related projects was 3,5% (6,5 million EEK, or about
400.000 Euro). The Estonian Science Foundation supported energy related basic
research with about EEK 1,8 mill (about 110.000 Euro). This was financed through
the state budget and by the European Science Foundation. The Ministry of Economics
and Communication financed some studies in addition to financing the Estonian
Enterprise (EAS), who grants applied research and product development.
Tallinn Technical University is performing energy R&D projects each year for ca 17
million EEK (about 1 mill Euro), mainly for Estonian Energy and other companies,
ministries, counties, etc. They are responsible for most of the energy research in
Estonia, and we therefore estimate the total volume for energy research in 2003 to 1
mill. Euro.
3.2.4
Expected future evolution
It is intended that by 2006, total expenditure on RD&I will be 1.5% of GDP. The
strategic principles for financing research and development will include a significant
increase in the state financing and more active participation of private and foreign
capital.
Estonia
122
Exhibit 3-10 Expected state budget financing of R&D according to the overall
Estonian R&D strategy [mill. EEK]
Source: “Knowledge-based Estonia. Estonian Research and Development Strategy 2002 –
2006”, Research and Development Council, 2002.
As the energy R&D strategy is not ready, it is not possible estimate the future
spending on energy research yet. However, energy is not one of the main priorities in
the overall RTDI strategy, and can not be expected to receive a large portion of the
funding.
Through the study “Assessment of the Estonian Research Development Technology
and Innovation Funding System” by Nedera and Georghiou at the Victoria University
of Manchester, four problems-reasons of the RDTI funding system in Estonia have
been identified:
1.
Insufficient funding for RDTI expressed in: under-funding of research
organisations; pressures in the system originating in this under-funding;
aging research (innovation) community; obsolete research equipment and
crumbling infrastructure; etc.;
2.
Lack of base-line funding for research institutions making the funding
process unpredictable, reducing the level of flexibility in the system,
preventing the development of research strategy at institutional level and
increasing the administrative overhead of research institutions;
3.
Fragmentation of the RDTI (funding) system as expressed in the mismatch
between research capacity and research users, the duality of the system and
the ensuing fragmentation of research funding;
4.
Problems broadly associated with the image and visions of research;
4
Current NNE RTD priorities relevant for ERA in NNE
RTD
The energy policy states that Estonia intends to increase the use of renewable energy
sources by two-thirds until 2010 in comparison with 1996 and to reduce the
importance of oil shale as fossil fuel. As oil shale research fits in with the objectives
of the research fund for coal and steel, it is agreed between Estonia and the EU that
oil shale is included in this research fund.
Estonia
123
An R&D energy strategy is being prepared by the Ministry of Economics and
Communication. After talking to experts from the Ministry and the main energy
research organisations, the following topics seem to be of great interest to Estonia:
•
oil shale as a primary national energy source
•
renewable energy (wind and bioenergy have been mentioned)
•
fuel cells and hydrogen energy technology
•
energy saving technologies
•
energy storage devices
•
reliability of energy supply
•
environmental friendly transport
The main reasons for choosing these fields seem to be harmonisation with EU energy
politics and use of the country’s own natural resources of oil shale.
Estonia is eager to participate in the EU 6th FP. For the better representation of
Estonian research within the European Union and in order to intensify the exchange
of information, the Government has dispatched an attaché for education and research
to Brussels. The participation in the 5th FP, is shown in the figure below.
Exhibit 4-1 Estonia’s participation in EU 5
th
Framework programme (Number
of projects)
Source: “Research and Development in Estonia 2000 – 2001” Research and Development
Council, 2002
5
Description of priority setting process
While actually all ministries should take responsibility for organising R&D activities
(including financing) within their respective governance domains in reality the two
ministries that are primarily involved in financing RDTI (and respectively
formulating and implementing policies for RDTI) are the Ministry of Education and
Estonia
124
Research and the Ministry of Economic Affairs and Communications.
Correspondingly, these two ministries have some additional responsibilities.
The long-term (project based) funding is decided by Ministry of Education on the
recommendation of the Science Competence Council (SCC). The Ministry of
Economic Affairs and Communications is responsible for applied research. Short-
term grants are allocated by the Estonian Science Foundation. In lower levels the
R&D strategies are set by energy companies and universities according to market
needs and trends. The Estonian Energy company also has influence in energy R&D.
When deciding on research funding the members of the SCC consider the following
three areas: 1) the quality of the research proposal (proposed research); 2) critical
mass of applying unit (2 full-time researchers or more); and 3) there is an attempt to
ensure continuity of funding so some security in the system is guaranteed. In practice,
however, there are no guarantees that the funding will be continued after the 5 or so
years for which allocation has been made.
6
Sources
1.1
Organisations:
Ministry of Economic Affairs and Communications:
http://www.mkm.ee/eng/
Research and Development Council:
www.tan.ee
Estonian Ministry of Education and research:
http://www.hm.ee/
Archimedes Foundation:
http://www.archimedes.ee
Estonian Energy Research Institute:
www.eeri.ee
Tallin Technical University:
www.ttu.ee
1.2
Other sources of information:
ERIS, Research and Science in Estonia
http://www.eris.ee/
Estonian Science Statistics and Policy Resources:
http://www.iiss.ee/etl/world/index.html
Baltic 21 Energy Sector:
http://www.ee/baltic21/report/reports/energy.htm
Ideal-IST
http://www.ideal-ist.net/
EU enlargement:
http://www.europa.eu.int/comm/enlargement/estonia/
Estonia’s EU agreement:
http://www.vm.ee/eng/euro/kat_318/2811.htmlo/kat_318
Filand
125
Country study Finland
Filand
127
Contents:
1
Summary of country study indicating main points for synergy
129
2
Main points for collaboration, synergy, complementarity with regard to the
NNE RTD ERA
130
3
Short background information
133
3.1
Overall energy situation
133
3.1.1
Energy policy
133
3.1.2
Exploration and reserves
133
3.1.3
Supply and Consumption
134
3.2
National RTDI system
135
3.2.1
Main actors
135
3.2.2
R&D Policy and Expenditure
136
3.2.3
Main actors
137
4
Current NNE RTD priorities relevant for ERA in NNE RTD
139
5
Description of Priority setting process
141
6
Sources / contacts
142
6.1
Meetings and interviews with the following persons:
142
6.2
Visited web-sites:
142
6.3
Written material:
142
Finland
129
1
Summary of country study indicating main points for
synergy
Finland is a net energy importer. It has no significant domestic reserves of any fossil
fuels except peat, and its electricity generation is not sufficient, without supplemental
imports, to meet demand. The total consumption in 2002 was 1 403 PJ.
Finland relies largely on nuclear and fossil-fuelled thermal-electric power plants for
its electricity supply. Many of the fossil-fuelled power plants use peat, especially the
smaller facilities which cogenerate combined heat and power (CHP).
Nuclear power has been part of Finland’s energy mix since the late 1970s, and it now
accounts for slightly more than 25% of its total electricity supply. In June 2002,
Finland’s parliament approved the decision to construct a fifth nuclear reactor.
There are presently about 200 hydroelectric power plants in Finland. However, most
of these are small. Finland has more than 60 relatively small wind power plants, with
a total installed capacity of more than 40 MWe.
Forest-based fuels are an important energy source in Finland. In 2001, about one
million cubic meters of forest fuels was consumed in Finland’s power plants, the
equivalent of nearly 2 TWh of usable energy. Finland has a national goal of
increasing that usage to 5 million cubic meters by the year 2010.
Tekes, The National Technology Agency
, is the main financing organisation for
applied and industrial R&D in Finland. Funding is granted from the state budget.
Tekes is the most important Finnish agency with regard to NNE RTD with an annual
budget for NNE of about 60 mill.
€
. Tekes is a financing body; they do not perform
research themselves.
The main focus is applied research, but basic research at Universities and Research
Institutions can also be funded. Tekes offers companies grants, capital loans and
industrial loans.
VTT
Technical Research Centre of Finland, is the largest national RTD institute in
the energy sector, and covers 30-50% of the Finnish energy RTD.
The importance of internationalisation has been clearly stated in the Finnish
innovation policy. Yet the full consequences and challenges posed by
internationalisation to organisations like Tekes and other research organisations are
still unforeseen. There is an ongoing change of policy also in Tekes as international
collaboration is given a higher focus. It is stated that about one third of the funded
RTD-projects should have a substantial international involvement. It has however
been expressed during the interviews that international focus seems to be more a
rhetoric phrase rather than concrete policy.
Tekes evaluates and takes the funding decisions for all the RTD-proposals by internal
persons, there are normally no use of external experts. Once a year the project
Finland
130
portfolio is evaluated and the administration discuss if there should be a change of
priorities.
A couple of expressed ideas for future ERA:
•
EU funds should be much more focused to be able to carry through large
programs on specific topics which are not possible on a national level.
•
European added value should be more important in the project evaluation
process.
The EU Commission has to be more pro-active to involve national programs, this is
crucial to get to the ERA.
Long term R&D activities might be a good area for ERA but the activities needs to be
more focused. In the short term activities, it is important to have a close cooperation
among the national managers of RTD programs and by this contact develop projects
for collaboration. The organisation of the IEA Implementing Agreements might be a
good example of this type of organisations.
The personal view of the author is that there are questions among Finnish RTD actors
both to the value of the current EU RTD programmes as well as the value of further
integration of European research in ERA.
2
Main points for collaboration, synergy, complementarity
with regard to the NNE RTD ERA
The importance of internationalisation has been clearly stated in the Finnish
innovation policy. Yet the full consequences and challenges posed by
internationalisation to organisations like Tekes and other research organisations are
still unforeseen.
A few years back, problems in the domestic energy system had the highest attention
in the RTD-programs, but more and more focus is given to international markets and
export possibilities for Finnish companies. There is an ongoing change of policy also
in Tekes as international collaboration is given a higher focus. It is stated that about
one third of the funded RTD-projects should have international involvement. Included
in the final reports to Tekes, all projects have to report on the level of international
collaboration.
As a general statement, it has however been expressed during the interviews that
international focus seems to be more a rhetoric phrase rather than concrete policy.
According to present policy, all the RTD programs should include some international
elements, but the experience and types of projects funded indicates that the overall
focus is still on domestic energy systems with limited international collaboration. The
international visions of Tekes do not seem to have enough influence on the project
funding decision process.
New project proposals are evaluated by Tekes according to a set of evaluation criteria.
Effective networking is described as one essential criterion. It is also stated that
projects that include the promotion of international cooperation are welcomed.
Finland
131
However, the author gets the impression that in practice, networking is important
mainly on a national level and international collaboration has less focus. This is
explained by language problems as well as limited incentives from Tekes to support
international collaboration. Tekes should be much more pro-active in this field.
The Finnish energy sector is described as very special compared to the situation in
most other European countries. The energy infrastructure is large, and Finland has a
high electricity intensity. (Annual consumption is 85 TWh). As a result many energy
players find it more convenient to have bilateral RTD collaboration with countries of
common interests instead of attending EU Programs. Also bilateral projects are
considered more effective than the EU-projects, due to much less paperwork.
As an example, Finland might be seen at as very national oriented in the bioenergy
sector. This can be explained because the EU 6.FP does not include production
technologies. The largest sector within the Finnish biomass sector is the pulp and
paper industry, and their main interest which is production technologies are not
included as a topic in the 6.FP.
Tekes runs several technology programs. It is an ongoing discussion on how these
programs should collaborate with EU- or other countries programs. There will
probably always be a potential conflict between international collaboration and
national interests. It was expressed that this can not be handled on a general level but
has to be discussed case by case. In certain sectors Tekes has to be very careful, this
for example is essential for some areas in the biomass sector.
The EU NNE program have typically 200 M
€
annual budget. As Finland has 2.5% of
the European GNP, the expected feedback from EU funds is very limited compared to
the national funds, typically 60 M
€
annually. From this it is to make the conclusion
that EU is not important in terms of funding in Finland
It is also a general opinion that Tekes has a much more simple bureaucracy than the
EU Commission, and the industry will first come to Tekes to get the projects
financed.
It seems to be a common understanding that the EU Programs are sources of funds,
but are not considered important in the process of developing the national RTD
strategy. There is little national interest to spend lot of resources to the development
of EU programs. It is a feeling that these programs are far away from the national
focuses. Other international collaboration activities, for example bilateral
collaboration, are considered as more important.
To which extent the Finnish programmes should open up and take active part in the
ERA is a topic for much discussions for the time being. There are different opinions
in Finland about the value of increased international cooperation. To collaborate on a
project basis is no problem, but to open up whole programs is more questionable.
The general impression is that Tekes in globally wants to increase the collaboration
with Japan and the US, and the EU collaboration is considered to be at an appropriate
level.
However, Finnish Universities and Research Institutions take part in several EU-
funded projects, and VTT Processes is the leader of a NOE in the bioenergy sector.
Finland
132
During 2003, international networking in company projects was on the level of 25-
45% and in the public research projects (universities and research institutes)
networking index was 50-60%. These figures represent the share of project funding in
projects having some kind of international co-operation compared to the total funding
in the energy, environmental and construction area.
A general opinion is that the long term public R&D is a matter for ERA, while more
short term projects with heavy industry involvement is much more difficult.
Comments also stressed that the present targets on renewables and especially the
incredible high focus on hydrogen was commented to be far from reality. This is bad
for the credibility of the Commission and will influence on the reliability of other
Commission targets like the ERA: “…to move from 15 + 1 RTD policies to one
integrated RTD policy.”
Tekes provides funds for companies for the preparation phase of EU proposals.
However the paying principle is no cure no pay. The proposals have to be accepted by
the Commission before Tekes pays the money. Integrated projects (IP) are important
step towards ERA, but these projects are big and the chance to carry through a
successful project proposal is limited. Finnish actors do not take the risk to start up
such work without a better commitment from Tekes.
Regarding research mobility, Finnish students and researchers tend to prefer to go to
the US before any European country. (Except for the Nordic countries where there is
a good exchange of researchers due to cultural similarities and special Nordic
incentives). In some countries (like Norway) there are more personal economic
incentives for the travel to the US due to reduced income taxes.
A couple of expressed ideas for future ERA:
•
EU funds should be much more focused to be able to carry through large
programs on specific topics which are to big on a national level.
•
European added value should be more important in the project evaluation
process.
The EU Commission has to be more pro-active to involve national programs, this is
crucial to get to the ERA.
Long term R&D activities might be a good area for ERA. But the program should be
more focused, so that the EU funds could be concentrated to areas where national
funds are too small to develop new technologies. Fusion is an example on such an
area, and other areas could be Hydrogen and PV.
In the short term activities, it is important to have a close cooperation among the
national managers of RTD programs and by this contact develop projects for
collaboration. The organisation of the IEA work might be a good example of this type
of organisations. A relatively large number of programmes or Implementing
Agreements are established, and these programmes are run by an Executive
Committee with one representative from the participating countries. The ExCo
members are national representatives, mostly persons from the relevant Ministry or
Finland
133
Government funding agencies who responsible for the national program in the actual
sector.
The personal view of the author is that there are questions among Finnish RTD actors
both to the value of the current EU RTD programmes as well as the value of further
integration of European research in ERA.
3
Short background information
3.1
Overall energy situation
3.1.1
Energy policy
The electric industry in Finland is regulated by the Electricity Market Authority
(EMA). EMA monitors the reasonableness of prices and the equal treatment of
customers and competitors. The Office of Free Competition monitors the wholesale
market for energy.
In June 1995, Finland’s Electricity Market Act removed the licensing requirements
for constructing power plants and selling electricity directly to ultimate customers.
The Act started out applying to large users over 500 megawatts (MWe), but has
included smaller users since 1997. The law also made it easier to import and export
electricity and has mandated transmission access and unbundled functional activities.
In May 1997, Finland adopted an energy strategy that includes promoting a
competitive energy market and diversifying energy supplies. The strategy also
emphasized energy efficiency, use of renewables, and reduction of carbon dioxide
emissions. In 1990, Finland became the first country in the world to institute a carbon
tax; the tax on district heating is based on the carbon content of the fuel. Finland also
has a tax on electricity usage.
3.1.2
Exploration and reserves
Finland is a net energy importer. It has no significant domestic reserves of any fossil
fuels except peat, and its electricity generation is not sufficient, without supplemental
imports, to meet demand. A diagram of Finland’s sources of primary energy sources
in 2002 is shown in the figure on the left. The total consumption in 2002 was 1 403
PJ.
Peat bogs cover about one-third of Finland’s total area, but Finland derives only a
relatively small proportion of its energy from peat. Peat presently constitutes about 6-
7% of Finland’s total primary energy supply, including about 18-20% of the energy
input for the smaller combined heat and power (CHP) facilities at municipal and
industrial sites.
Exhibit 3-1 Sources of primary energy, 2002
Finland
134
Peat; 6,4
Other; 0,9
Hydro
powe r; 2,7
Nuclear
powe r;
16,7
Oil 25,9
Natural
gas 10,9
Coal 13,3
Wind
energy;
0,1
Wood
fuels; 20,0
Net
imports of
elec tricity
3,1
Source: Tekes
3.1.3
Supply and Consumption
Finland relies largely on nuclear and fossil-fuelled thermal-electric power plants for
its electricity supply. Many of the fossil-fuelled power plants use peat, especially the
smaller facilities that cogenerate combined heat and power (CHP). Electricity is also
imported from neighbouring countries (mostly from Sweden and Russia), accounting
for about 10% of the electricity consumed in Finland.
All of Finland’s oil is imported, with oil imports being handled by Finland’s energy
company, Fortum Oy, which was created in 1998 as the merger of the electricity
generating company Imatran Voima Oy (IVO) and the oil company Neste Oy.
All of Finland’s gas is imported from Russia. The gas import company is Gasum Oy,
which also is responsible for natural gas transmission within Finland. Natural gas
presently accounts for about 11% of Finland’s total energy needs. About three-
quarters of the gas is used for combined heat and power (CHP) generation in
industrial and municipal power plants.
Finland’s coal is imported from Poland, Russia, and the United States, and is used for
electricity generation and steelmaking process.
Nuclear power has been part of Finland’s energy mix since the late 1970s, and it now
accounts for slightly more than 25% of its total electricity supply. Finland has two
nuclear power plants, the 1,020 MWe Loviisa facility originally built by IVO and
now owned by Fortum Oy and the 1,680 MWe Olkiluoto facility owned by
Teollisuuden Voyma Oy (TVO). In June 2002, Finland’s parliament approved the
decision to construct a fifth nuclear reactor, the first time a new nuclear power plant
in western Europe had been approved in more than a decade.
There are presently about 200 hydroelectric power plants in Finland. However, most
of these are small -- only eight have generating capacities of at least 100 MWe with
none more than 200 MWe.
Finland
135
Finland presently has more than 60 relatively small wind power plants, with a total
installed capacity of more than 40 MWe. Most of these are less than 2 MWe, and all
are located near the seacoast or in northern mountain areas.
Forest-based fuels are an important energy source in Finland. In 2001, about one
million cubic meters of forest fuels was consumed in Finland’s power plants, the
equivalent of nearly 2 TWh of usable energy. Finland has a national goal of
increasing that usage to 5 million cubic meters by the year 2010.
3.2
National RTDI system
3.2.1
Main actors
Science policy is the responsibility of the
Ministry of Education
; the most important
financing organisation for fundamental academic research is the
Academy of
Finland
.
Tekes, The National Technology Agency
, is the main financing organisation for
applied and industrial R&D in Finland. Funding is granted from the state budget.
The Ministry of Trade and Industry
oversees Finland’s technology policy.
The Science and Technology Policy Council
of Finland, chaired by the Prime
Minister, advises the government and its ministries in questions relating to science
and technology. The Council is responsible for the strategic development and
coordination of Finnish science and technology policy as well as of the national
innovation system as a whole.
Exhibit 3-2 Organisation of the Finish science and technology system
Source: www.research.fi/innojarj_en.html
Finland
136
3.2.2
R&D Policy and Expenditure
Finland is increasingly investing in research and technological development and R&D
investment now totals 4.9 billion euros, 3.5 per cent of the Gross Domestic Product
(GDP) in 2002. The private sector share accounted for 3.4 billion euros.
On an operational level Tekes independently promotes and coordinates R&D projects
and programmes, in addition to maintaining cooperation within international
networks.
The primary objective of Tekes is to improve the competitiveness of Finnish industry
and the service sector by technological means. Activities are aimed at diversifying
production structures, increasing productivity and exports and creating a foundation
for employment and social well-being. Tekes finances applied and industrial R&D in
Finland to an extent of nearly 400 M
€
annually.
The technology programmes are an essential part of the Finnish innovation system.
About 50% of Tekes financing is directed through the present 34 programmes.
Technology programmes are used to promote development in specific sectors of
technology and industry, and to pass on results of the research work to businesses.
Exhibit 3-3 Innovation system – Resources and funding 2001
DM 32190
03 -2003 Copyright © Tekes
Innovation system
Resources and funding in 2001
Private
Basic research
Applied research
Business R&D
Business development
Marketing
Internationalisation
R&D
at companies
3,284
The figures represent the total extent of each organisation in m
illion euros in 2001. In parenthesis the share that
is funded from the State budget. The funds of Tekes, the Academy
of Finland and Innofin are funded entirely
from the S tate budget.
Business
Ange ls
380
Public
Finnvera
332 (44)
Universities
834 (364)
Academy
of Finland
184
Ministries,
TE-Centres,
sectorial research
287 (209)
Tekes
386
VTT
214 (68)
From abroad
115
Innofin
5 (4)
Finpro
55 (30)
Venture capitalists:
Private 287
Industry Investment Ltd 38 (42)
Sitra 64
Source: Tekes
The figure above shows the Finnish innovation system. The numbers represent the
total extent of each organisation in million euros in 2001. In parenthesis the share that
is funded from the State budget. The funds of Tekes, the Academy of Finland and
Innofin are funded entirely from the State budget.
Tekes is the most important Finnish agency with regard to NNE RTD. The annual
budget for NNE is about 60 mill.
€
, which could be compared to less than 1 mill.
€
for
NNE from the Academy of Finland.
Finland
137
Exhibit 3-4 Tekes’ annual budget for NNE-RTD
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
1999
2000
2001
2002
Million ?
Wind power
Solar energy
Bioenergy
Hydro power
Waste-to-energy
Nuclear fission
Nuclear fusion
Other energy technology
Other energy production
Energy use
Other climate technology
Source: Tekes
TEKES is a financing body; they do not perform research themselves.
The main focus is applied research, but also basic research at Universities and
Research Institutions can be funded. The outcome of the basic research activities
should always be public available, and Tekes can in principle cover up to 100% of the
eligible costs. Projects should however always be of importance to the industry, and
most of these projects have 10-20% of finance from the industry. The industrial co-
financing is assumed to be a good sign of industrial relevance of these kinds of
projects.
An example of a fundamental research area could be university projects dealing with
basic combustion processes.
Tekes offers companies grants, capital loans and industrial loans. Funding is given
within the following parameters:
•
Industrial R&D grants run from 15 to 50 percent of the eligible costs.
•
Capital R&D loans run from 35 to 60 percent of the eligible costs.
•
Industrial R&D loans run from 45 to 70 percent of the eligible costs.
Differing funding measures can be combined in a single project. One project may, for
example, receive a grant of 15 percent of the eligible costs, and in addition, a loan of
45 percent.
About 60% of Tekes budget is allocated to programs, the other part is allocated to so-
called free projects.
3.2.3
Main actors
VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland is the largest national RTD institute in the
energy sector, and covers 30-50% of the Finnish energy RTD. VTT is a contract
research organisation and provides a wide range of technology and applied research
services for its clients, private companies, institutions and the public sector.
Turnover is about 220 million euros.
Finland
138
VTT has 30% of the turnover as basic funds from the Ministry of Trade and Industry.
Other big contributors are Tekes and the Finnish industry. Through the participation
of VTT in EU-projects, the Commission covers about 10% of the turnover.
VTT Processes
is a technology partner for energy and forest clusters and has 550
employees. The institute offer demonstration services with their large-scale facilities.
An important part of the operation is the development of new growth areas. The
research fields are:
•
Nuclear energy
•
Energy production
•
Emission Control
•
Pulp and Paper Industry
•
Materials and Chemicals
Other key R&D players in Finland:
•
Helsinki University of Technology
•
Lappeenranta University of Technology
•
Tampere University of Technology
•
Åbo University
•
Oulu University
•
Vasa University
Key industry players in this sector are:
•
Foster Wheeler (boilers, gasifiers, steam turbines)
•
Wãrtsilä (engines)
•
PVO (utility)
•
Vapo (peat production)
•
Vacon (energy efficient technologies)
•
ABB (energy efficient technologies and generator for wind)
•
KWH-pipe OY (district heating pipes and solar collectors)
•
NAPS (PV systems)
•
Autocompo OY (manufacturer of copper products, heat exchangers and solar
absorbers)
•
LPM (heat exchangers)
•
Win-Wind OY (wind turbines)
•
Rantarokki OY (special iron for wind turbines and solar collectors)
•
Metso (gear systems for wind turbines)
•
Wind Arc OY (offshore wind)
Key associations:
•
Finergy (
Finnish Energy Industries Federation)
is an organisation of the
companies carrying out power and heat generation, procurement, transmission,
sales, and building of power transmission grid.
•
Sky (
The Finnish District Heat Association
(FDHA) is an to promote district
heating and Combined Heat and Power (CHP) generation.
Finland
139
•
Finnish Forest Industry Association
•
Finnish Wind Energy Association
•
Finnish Solar Industries Group
•
Finnish Heat Pump Association
4
Current NNE RTD priorities relevant for ERA in NNE
RTD
The importance of internationalisation has been clearly stated in the Finnish
innovation policy. Yet the full consequences and challenges posed by
internationalisation to organisations like Tekes and other research organisations are
still unforeseen.
Tekes actively encourages open cooperation on program level and is eager to be
involved in the preparation of
joint technology programs
in cooperation with other
funding authorities in different countries. Such programs should focus on
international cooperation and how this can provide
added value to the participants
.
Funding authorities agree on the general principles of funding and the interpretation
of the results (IPR).
Exhibit 4-1 Decision making and financing of collaborative projects
Source: www.tekes.fi
Typically, international cooperation is accomplished in the field of basic research,
however enterprises are also encouraged to collaborate with their foreign counterparts
in greater depth as joint technology programs can provide an ideal framework for
collaboration. Foundations for cooperation are in the main, made at project level.
Foreign research institutes, universities and enterprises benefit from direct access to
top-level research and development projects
within the Tekes technology
programmes. The program management organizes opportunities for building
partnerships
between foreign companies and program participants. Relevant costs of
participation are primarily covered by the foreign entity itself or by national funding
from its own country of origin.
Finland
140
Research institutes and enterprises from outside of Finland can also participate in the
Tekes technology programmes using a variety of means.
Research Institutes and Universities
Research institutes and universities can become jointly involved or alternatively pair
up with partners in industry. Public funding covers the costs of the research institutes
and universities and each participant receives funding from its country of origin.
There are three different forms of cooperation.
1. Exchange of research information
•
Networking and meeting partners
•
Arranging seminars in Finland or abroad
•
Exchange of research plans and results
2. Joint research projects
•
Projects with a common objective and shared tasks - Each party will be
funded primarily by their own sources
- Rights for the results are agreed among the participants
•
Subcontracting for research projects - Project participant purchases services
from a foreign research unit to complete its own project
- A Finnish research unit offers a service to a foreign institute for a common
objective of the project
3. Mobility of researchers within a collaboration project
•
A foreign researcher is employed by the project - The project participants
will utilize results as agreed
- IPR: according to own agreement
•
A Finnish researcher works at a foreign research unit for executing specific
parts of the project Tekes may support extra costs resulting from international
cooperation
Industry
R&D cooperation for industry can be pre-competitive or it can lead to the creation of
joint business based upon the results of the project. The benefits include a shorter
time to the market with controlled risks as a result of close cooperation. Public
funding covers R&D costs of the enterprises. Each enterprise receives funding from
its own country of origin. Foreign enterprises can participate in Tekes technology
programmes in four different ways.
1. Joint project
•
Common objective, shared resources and tasks
•
Each party covers their own costs as agreed
•
Utilisation of the results agreed among the participants
2. Subcontracting
•
Project participants may purchase services from a foreign entity to
complement the project, provided no such domestic source is available
3. Technology transfer
Finland
141
•
Project participants may purchase licensed or existing technology from a
foreign entity to complement R&D project work
4. Collaboration for marketing and distributing the project results
•
Project participants may collaborate with foreign enterprises in order to bring
the products to the market
5
Description of Priority setting process
Technology programs are used by Tekes to promote development in specific sectors
of technology or industry, and to pass on results of the research work to business in an
efficient way. Programs have proved to be an effective form of cooperation and
networking for companies and the research sector. During 2003, a total of 34 national
technology programs are under way. In 2002, Tekes provided 204 million euros to
financing technology programs.
To plan a new program is a long process, normally 1-2 years. The planning process
includes market studies, as well as identification of actors and players in the sector.
This includes studies on an international level. These studies are crucial for starting
up new programs. External groups, industry, agency, R&D institutions, are involved
in the preliminary discussions. The final content, priorities and financing is decided
by internal persons in Tekes. The decision of launching a program is made by the
board of Tekes.
Implementation of Programs
Each technology programme has a steering group, a co-ordinator and a responsible
person at Tekes. The duration of the programs ranges from three to five years; their
volumes range from 10 million to 120 million euros. Tekes usually finances about
half of the costs of programs. The second half comes from participating companies.
Evaluation of Programs
The impact analysis unit in Tekes uses external experts to carry out the evaluation of
technology programmes in order to compile varied and independent effectiveness
data. The evaluation provides information and understanding on the dynamics of
research and development practice and the factors contributing to its success or
failure.
Tekes technology programmes are always evaluated at the end of the programme and
often also halfway through. The aim of the evaluation is to provide feedback on how
the programme aims have been realized, to find out how relevant the programme is
and to produce information to support the strategic development of programme
activities and the activities of Tekes in general.
The programs and their results are described in the evaluation and final reports which
ar mostly public available.
Project evaluation
Tekes evaluates and takes the funding decisions for all the RTD-proposals by internal
persons, there are normally no use of external experts.
The following factors are evaluated:
Finland
142
•
The company’s competitiveness and growth
•
The competitive advantages of the proposed technology
•
The company’s financial and other resources
•
The positive impact of Tekes financing on the project
In addition, Tekes welcomes projects that involve:
•
Networking with other companies
•
Joint execution between SMEs, large companies and universities
•
Subcontracting services provided by Finnish SMEs
•
Participation in national technology programmes
•
Contracting of services from Finnish research institutes and universities
•
The promotion of international cooperation
Once a year the project portfolio is evaluated and the administration discuss if there
should be a change of priorities.
There is a discussion going on in Finland on how the government funds could be
involved in public procurement projects. The motivation for a more active role in this
will be to help the industry into the initial phase of a commercial market.
6
Sources / contacts
6.1
Meetings and interviews with the following persons:
•
Mikko Kara, Executive Director, VTT Processes
•
Robin Gustafsson, Senior Technolgy Advisor, TEKES Impact Analysis
•
Peter Lund, Professor, Helsinki University of Technology, Dept. of Physics
•
Jukka Lepälahti, Tekes
1.3
Visited web-sites:
•
Energy overview Finland:
http://www.fossil.energy.gov/international/finover.html
•
Research Finland:
www.research.fi
•
Ministry of education:
http://www.minedu.fi/minedu/research/index.html
•
Tekes:
www.tekes.fi
•
VTT:
www.vtt.fi
•
Energia – meeting point
www.energia.fi
1.4
Written material:
•
Climate change – Impacts of technology policy and programmes; Tekes 2003
•
Growing Power – Advanced solutions for bioenergy technology from Finland;
Tekes 2002
•
Energy visions 2030 for Finland; VTT Energy, 2003
France
143
Country study France
France
145
Contents:
1 Summary of country study indicating main points for synergy
147
2 Main points for collaboration, synergy, complementarity with regard to the
NNE RTD ERA
147
2.1
Necessary conditions for making ERA happen
147
2.1.1
Energy and Research strategies, and decentralisation of project management 147
2.1.2
Excellence vs. egalitarian development
148
2.1.3
Public/private collaborations
148
2.1.4
Mobility
149
2.1.5
Importance of personal relations
149
2.2
Existing opportunities for ERA
149
2.2.1
Importance of involvement in the Framework programme
149
2.2.2
European relationships
150
2.2.3
International collaborations
150
2.2.4
Language and research methods are two main barriers for collaboration
151
2.3
Concrete possible policy actions
151
2.3.1
Financial and funding implications, and suggestions
151
2.3.2
European research as platform for national research
151
2.3.3
A shift from energy to environment related research
152
3 Short background information
152
3.1
The overall energy situation of France
152
3.1.1
Distribution of energy sources
152
3.1.2
Imports/exports
153
3.1.3
Market concentration
153
3.2
The national RTDI system
154
3.2.1
Public/private spending on RTD
154
3.2.2
Public research institutions
155
3.2.3
Funding system
155
4 Brief description of NNE RTD organisation
157
4.1
Main actors
157
4.1.1
Ministries
157
4.1.2
ADEME, the French energy and environment management agency
158
4.1.3
Public research and technology organisations
161
4.1.4
Companies
167
5 Current NNE RTD priorities relevant for ERA in NNE RTD
168
5.1
Figures
168
5.2
Energy issues are strongly linked to environment
169
5.3
Two national “research networks” relate to NNE RTD
169
6 Description of Priority setting process
170
6.1
Two main objectives: reducing greenhouse gas emissions and promote a new energetic
mix
170
6.2
The relationships between public research organisations, ADEME, and supervision
(‘tutelle’) ministries, in priority setting processes
171
6.3
Importance given to scientific evaluation of projects
171
France
146
6.3.1
Programme evaluation
171
6.3.2
Other RTD support activities
172
6.4
Priority setting process: the importance of networks (formal and informal)
173
6.5
The Foresight exercise of ADEME, CEA and CNRS
174
France
147
1
Summary of country study indicating main points for
synergy
In analysing France with regard to NNE RTD it is important to acknowledge first of
all that a major feature of the French energy system is constituted by the
predominance of nuclear energy. 70 to 80% of final electricity consumption have over
the past decades been produced by nuclear power. Renewable energy was the post-
war pillar of French energy policy, but this concerned large scale hydropower mainly,
with a national policy of major dams since the 1950s, the potential for hydropower
being today fully exploited. Solar and wind energy have always played a very minor
role in the national energy mix. Because of nuclear energy however, representing low
CO2 emissions, energy efficiency in transport is relatively important in order to
respond to Kyoto targets.
In the area of non-nuclear energy 4 major actors are active in France – the national
energy Agency (ADEME) which implements several incentive RTD programmes
related to different aspects of NNE (both oriented towards rational use of energy and
to new and renewable energy sources). These programmes range from quite
“upstream” (in the field of fuel cells for instance), to “downstream,” user oriented
programmes (RUE, domotics, etc). The second major actor is the national petroleum
research institute IFP which is a research performer. As the name indicates it is
involved with exploration, extraction, processing and use of petroleum derivatives.
Thirdly, the CNRS, the French (public) fundamental research institute is leading a
major programme related to non-nuclear energy research. Finally, 25% of EDF
(Electricité de France, an electricity company) R&D budget is mainly dedicated to
fossil-fired power plants, hydroelectricity and renewable energies.
2
Main points for collaboration, synergy, complementarity
with regard to the NNE RTD ERA
2.1
Necessary conditions for making ERA happen
Before entering into country specific issues it is important to mention some of the
more generic observations made by the persons interviewed in France. These concern
FP6, the balance between excellence and egalitarianism in RTD and public-private
collaborations. After having this discussed these this chapter will consider country
specific issues and suggestions.
2.1.1
Energy and Research strategies, and decentralisation of project management
A quite interesting feature of the French interviews is that most people encountered
were very much in favour of creating multi-lateral networks, not so much of
researchers per se, but of programme managers, who far less have the occasion to
encounter each other.
A representative of ADEME, the French Energy and Environment Agency, suggested
a more strategic and pro-active approach to be taken by the European Commission to
France
148
organise and prioritise its RTD support. By identifying the actors in a given field (or
from a certain product, service or method) at a European level, gaps and
imperfections in the “network” from research to the market can be identified and
actions defined. The European Commission should take a role of facilitator and
concentrate on strategy, programme definition, etc., and the national agencies
responsible for energy research should be much more networked and co-ordinated
and, implement and manage this strategy, directly integrated in projects.
This latest point is also stressed by the representative of the IFP (French Oil Research
Institute), who regrets the lack of strategic planning known to be present in the 1970’s
in hydrocarbons. “Europe” should elaborate “long term strategies, with well-defined
choices.” Finally, representatives from the French Ministry of Industry that were
interviewed for the present study suggested that benefits may also come from
increased co-ordination and co-operation between the Framework Programme
implemented by DG RESEARCH and the policy-orientated programmes managed by
DG TREN. The expectation is that this would enhance relevance of RTD work
through macro-economical reflections on energy issues and policies.
Finally, the director of the CNRS Energy Programme also suggested that contacts
should be established between European programme managers, to discuss of the
necessities of each country beyond European programmes. This could led to a better
matching of NNE RTD activities: for example, Germany could decide to launch a
research programme on clean coal exploitation and should be able to identify French
researchers do have the competencies for that activity and could join in with the
German programme easily. Today this is much left to the researchers’ own initiative.
In other words, a far more pro-active approach to European co-ordination at all levels
seems to be favoured.
2.1.2
Excellence vs. egalitarian development
In the interviews a striking opposition could be found between those interviewees
who though that there should not be the (implicit) obligation to associate smaller or in
R&D terms less developed countries to European research projects: only scientific
excellence and competence should count. The opposite view was also expressed
however and consisted in saying that associating such countries has helped countries
in the “second circle” of academic research to boost their competence, which in the
longer term would be beneficial to the Union as a whole. This is an important subject
again today with the advent of the new accession countries in the EU: the danger of
creating poles or networks of (previously proven) excellence may exclude countries
with potential but who currently would not have the means to impose themselves. A
balance should therefore be sought between the two criteria “excellence” and a sort of
“egalitarianism.”
2.1.3
Public/private collaborations
Several issues concerning the relationships between public and private collaborations
have been highlighted during the interviews in France. On the one hand, it was
sometimes felt that industry prefers a national support for its RTD: this is more
simple, less hazardous, management is less heavy. Moreover in European
France
149
collaborations the results are almost always public, and the return on investment at the
national level is problematic.
A different point of view was that the collaboration between public research and
industry is fruitful, even if culturally the building of a relationship takes time.
According to a research director of a private company interviewed, the key issue is to
what extent and at which point in the development the different actors involved are
willing to share information. Agreements between partners on (sharing of) IPR are
seen as increasingly crucial.
2.1.4
Mobility
Mobility is problematic and does not seem to be well developed among French
researchers. One of the specificities of the French situation is that most of the public
researchers are civil servants and this makes it difficult both to send out or receive
researchers. Mobility therefore mainly comes through doctorates and post-doc
positions.
Hiring foreign researchers in companies may be hampered because of administrative
barriers. In the public research sector on the contrary, foreign researchers, also non-
EU, can be easily employed
The Strategy Direction of CNRS (National Centre of Scientific Research, the main
public research body) has decided to favour the introduction of foreign teams in the
CNRS Energy Programme. For example, a French research team in Nancy is used to
work with a German team. German researchers are then invited to assist in the
internal meetings of the French team. The German team does not obtain CNRS
funding but it gives them extra “points” when they are evaluated. The director of the
Energy Programmes suggests that such initiatives could be further worked out and
improved with a view on ERA.
2.1.5
Importance of personal relations
Finally, although it may sound as a cliché, all persons interviewed emphasise the key
role played by personal relations among the scientific community. Events which put
people into contact etc., are a good way to create (international) networks which then
should be further consolidate by real opportunities for working together – but then
this is what the Framework Programme has been trying to do, often with success, over
the past decades.
2.2
Existing opportunities for ERA
France has in the past been quite active in NNE RTD at the European level. As just
one example, one can cite the AFME (ADEME’s predecessor) who was very much
involved in the development of the European label on energetic consumption of
electric household goods. Other examples are geothermal energy, photovoltaic energy
and fuel cells.
2.2.1
Importance of involvement in the Framework programme
The integration in the European Framework Programme is seen as an important
objective for French research in NNE RTD. Being visible at the European level is
France
150
seen as a matter of survival, because participating to a European project leads to new
contacts (relations with other research organisations) and to visibility. It is generally
thought however that European priorities should be in line with French priorities.
Advice, if not influence, on these priorities is seen as important.
2.2.2
European relationships
Relations with neighbour Germany are one of the strongest and most common RTD
relations: examples of bilateral research initiatives can be found in transport, where
the national programmes Mobilität in Germany and PREDIT in France have launched
common calls for proposals, and where in geothermal research a joint RTD project
exists (Hot Dry Rock at Soultz in the east of France; this is co-funded though by the
EU; it also associates Switzerland). For many interviewees encountered Germany is
frequently, in the environmental field, a reference, since generally seen as advanced
in environment related technologies.
Besides Germany, the main European partners of France actors in NNE RTD are
Spain, Italy, Greece, the Netherlands (TNO being the main reference here), Denmark
and the United Kingdom. On specific topics collaboration with other countries exist,
such as with Sweden on biomass (ADEME) or Iceland on the hydrogen economy
(CEA). These relationships appear to be established, most of the time, through
European FP projects. Following these collaborations, it is quite usual that bilateral
agreements between two European public research bodies are signed. For example,
the CEA with the German LBST on the development of technico-economical
modelling related to NNE.
Collaborations mainly result from two factors: geography and technological/research
affinities. The Soultz European project is a good illustration of both.
27
It is a deep
geothermal project, based on “hot dry rock technology,” involving 3 European
countries (France, Germany and Switzerland). These countries are the only European
ones to have potential deposits.
2.2.3
International collaborations
France participates in the IEA. Bilateral RTD collaborations are mostly thematically
inspired. Most French actors active in the field of NNE RTD (ADEME, CEA,
National Oil Institute-IFP, EDF, Ministry in charge of Research…) collaborate with
partners in the United States (mainly focused on hydrogen and fuel cells). Other
bilateral collaborations exist with eastern European countries (Romania is cited
because the two languages have common roots, many Romanians speak French, and
the relationships between the 2 countries are historical), Mediterranean area (Maghreb
countries – with which because of colonial history close relationships exist – and
Middle-East), Asia (China, Japan, Korea, India, Thailand, Vietnam…), Brazil. All
such collaborations relate to specific thematic interests: ADEME has a focus on
sustainable development and renewable energy ; IFP on petroleum and petroleum by
product strategic developments (collaborations with Middle-East or Latin America for
example); the French atomic energy agency CEA is aiming to mobilise its traditional
nuclear sector network for non nuclear energy activities ; the research network of
EDF R&D comprises the University of Tsinghua or the Thermal Power Research
27
www.soultz.net
France
151
Institute (TPRI) in China. Many of these collaborations are only emerging (for
example between ADEME and Japan).
2.2.4
Language and research methods are two main barriers for collaboration
Two major barriers were identified through the interviews: language and research
work methods.
Language is often if not always cited as a main barrier for research cooperation.
English is the scientific language, but is not always spoken fluently by French
researchers in the area. Mobility, of course, is a way to partially solve that problem;
the situation is improving.
“Research culture” also matters. Work methods and work organisation are crucial:
one of the interviewees – director of an energy programme at a major public research
organisation – stressed that Spanish teams are organised much like US teams, i.e. one
professor with 2 or 3 researchers. In the United Kingdom or Germany the size and
organisational structure of research laboratories is more like in France hence
facilitating communication and collaboration.
2.3
Concrete possible policy actions
2.3.1
Financial and funding implications, and suggestions
For several partners interviewed – but the issue seems more important for more
applied research – it takes a lot of effort (including financial) to build up or to
participate to an European project, but the financial return is very low. The
preparation is heavy, the management with sometime 20 partners can be ‘monstrous’,
and proposals are not always successful. The expenditures for building international
partnerships are quite substantial and the aspect of cost-effectiveness should be taken
into account.
2.3.2
European research as platform for national research
For ADEME, the European level is sometime very quibbling, so the Agency uses this
level to redefine the activities eventually conduct at other levels: the European level
can trigger topics that are translated into national terms and nationally treated. A good
example is formed by fuel cells. These, after having been virtually “banned” from the
French NNE research landscape started off again with a JOULE project in the
beginning of the 1990s, and are now subject of a national “network” (PACO – see
below for more detail). Retrospectively, the Framework programme has served as
stepping stone to get the item back on the
national
research agenda. This movement
was however not inspired by the quibbling-ness of the European level alone, but also
by other considerations such as credibility of the research theme in France, and the
European research programme providing a platform on which new ideas could be
tested, before introducing them back onto the national research scene. Especially in
France, where, as said, NNE research has never been top priority, European
programmes have been very important in this respect in the past.
France
152
2.3.3
A shift from energy to environment related research
In the eyes of our French interviewees, energy and environmental research are seen as
very close, mainly due to the Kyoto Protocol and to the thoughts on greenhouse
effect.
28
Some of our interviewees wished that the European Commission make
precise political choices concerning renewables and new energies in this regard.
However another, more critical point of view was expressed, i.e. that environmental
concerns should not alter long term energy needs and energy RTD competencies.
The European Framework Programme’s recent orientation towards environmental
issues has undermined, among research teams, the interest for longer term RTD
relating to energy supply. This unbalance could in the longer term alter scientific
expertise in energy matters, as a matter of training, of technical competencies.
Socio-economic RTD has been mentioned in association with both energy and
environmental RTD. RTD on “social acceptance” to be performed in early stages of
technological trajectories, was underlined as a necessity by many French
interviewees.
3
Short background information
3.1
The overall energy situation of France
French energy policy has been characterised over the past decades by 3 principal
objectives:
•
Security and energy supply
•
Economic efficiency (low energy prices)
•
Sustainable and environmentally benign energy supply (cf. Kyoto Protocol :
France is required to stabilise its CO2 equivalent emissions – 6 gases – by 2008-
2012)
Also, energy policy refers to the principle of public service or general interest: cf. the
Electricity Act (“
Loi de la modernisation et du développement du service public de
l’électricité
,” 10 February 2000). The electricity cost to the consumer is the same all
over the French territory (principle of “peréquation”). It is especially the latter
principle that in the past allowed the development of alternative energy production,
i.e. in geographical niche markets (overseas territories, remote sites such as mountain
areas) where nuclear energy would be too expensive.
3.1.1
Distribution of energy sources
The French energy system has 3 main characteristics
•
A high share of nuclear energy in the energy mix. This has consequences on
R&D: during the past 30 years there have been many investments in that sector,
especially to standardise nuclear reactors.
•
little national fossil fuel resources: gas, oil, and especially few coal (the last
French coal mine will be closed in 2004). The share of coal in the energy mix is
28
For example the Ministries of Environment (MEDD) and Research seem very concerned by
biological and biomimetic RTD: how to produce energy resources from vegetal energy caption.
France
153
very low ; concerning the share of oil, France is in the European average, and for
the share of gas France is slightly under the European average
•
the production of renewable energy can be considered as a strong point, as in from
1950s a national policy of great dams was established; France has developed
technologies in hydraulics, related later to nuclear energy. Today, the potential for
hydraulic energy is fully exploited. Also, the production of energy linked to the
wood sector is increasingly important. Solar and wind energies only have a minor
share in the energy supply.
Exhibit 3-1 French energy share of TPES in 2000
Source : IEA
As a consequence of the high share of nuclear in the energy production and supply,
France is one of the lowest producers of greenhouse gas in Europe. The sectors
mainly emitting increasingly greenhouse gas are transports and housing. The
energetic consumption of industry has been stabilised after many years of effort.
29
3.1.2
Imports/exports
Following the 1973 oil crisis; one of the main objectives of French energy (RTD)
policy was to become as independent as possible from energy imports. From that
moment on France has launched a nuclear programme with the objective of national
independence.
3.1.3
Market concentration
EDF (Electricity of France) and GDF (Gas of France) are nationalised firms (but their
privatisation is on the way). They are, for the moment, in situation of monopoly,
although this is shortly bound to change in regards to the market opening process
(July 2004 : 70% of the market opens by enlargement to all non-residential customers,
totally 250 TWh).
The oil sector is private. TotalFina and Elf merged in 2000, after Elf was privatised.
29
Bernard Spinner,
Pourquoi un programme Energie au CNRS ?,
Le journal du CNRS n° 389,
2003.
France
154
3.2
The national RTDI system
3.2.1
Public/private spending on RTD
The Research and Development Domestic Expenditure (DIRD-“
Dépense Intérieure
de Recherche et Développement
”) assesses the research effort accomplished on the
national territory ; and the Research and Development National Expenditure (DNRD-
“
Dépense Nationale de Recherche et Développement
”) assesses the research outlay
of French actors whatever the place of accomplishment.
Exhibit 3-2 Structure of DIRD and DNRD 2000-2002 (M
€
)
2000
2001
2002
(estimated)
DNRD
32 081
33 570
34 195
Financing by administrations
14 404
14 673
15 276
Financing by firms
17 677
18 897
18 919
Share of administrations in DNRD
44,9%
43,7%
44,7%
DIRD
31 517
32 887
33 396
Accomplished by administrations
11 717
12 105
12 614
Accomplished by firms
19 800
20 782
20 782
Share of firms in DIRD
62,8%
63,2%
62,2%
Share of DIRD in GDP
2,22%
2,23%
2,20%
Share of DIRDA
30
in GDP
0,83%
0,82%
0,83%
Share of DIRDE
31
in GDP
1,39%
1,41%
1,37%
Source : MJENR – DEP B3 – 08/2003
Exhibit 3-3 Contributions to DNRDA in 2000
M
€
Structure
BCRD
32
7 228
50,7%
Contribution of French State to FP
419
2,9%
Ministry of Defence
2 589
18,2%
Ministry of Education for universities
2 763
19,4%
Other ministries
250
1,7%
Regions
142
1,0%
Non-profit making institutions (except subventions)
239
1,7%
Proper resources (contracts…)
626
4,4%
DNRDA
14 256
100,0%
Source : MJENR
Some cross-combinations are existing ; for example, for the universities, a credit line
“university research” exists in the BCRD, in addition to the contribution of the
Ministry of Youth, National Education and Research for the financing of university
research.
30
DIRD of Administrations
31
DIRD of firms (
Entreprises
)
32
Civil Budget for Research and Development
France
155
Exhibit 3-4 Distribution of research jobs in public administrations and firms
1999
2000
Administrations
140 167
145 464
Firms
171 564
177 688
TOTAL
311 731
323 143
Projet de loi de Finances 2003
3.2.2
Public research institutions
In France, the following types of organisations perform research
•
Public research organisations:
−
EPST (Scientific and Technological Public Institution – Etablissement public à caractère
scientifique et technologique)
−
EPIC (Economically and commercially oriented Public Institution – Etablissement public à
caractère économique et commercial)
−
Specific research organisations, with a private status but publicly funded: IFP for example
(the National Petroleum Institute)
•
Higher education institutions, divided in universities and “Grandes écoles”
−
Research in higher education is done by universities and by ‘grandes écoles’. Their R&D
expenditure is of 3 928 M
€
(including salaries, logistic…), with 61 318 employed in R&D in
2000
33
.
•
Ministries are also leading research (EPA : Public Administrative Institution –
Etablissement public à caractère administratif)
Exhibit 3-5 Distribution of research jobs in high education institutions and
public administrations
1999
2000
EPIC
21 112
21 253
EPST
44 217
45 891
EPA
8 339
10 296
Universities and “Grandes écoles”
59 689
61 318
Projet de loi de Finances 2003
3.2.3
Funding system
BCRD: Civil Budget of Research and Development
The BCRD is the government co-ordination mechanism for the individual ministries’
research budgets. It describes the budget
•
to public research institutions
34
: they define their own programmes strategies and
objectives
•
per ministry, to fund RTD actions
The BCRD is co-ordinated by the Ministry of Research, who co-ordinates the
proposals made by individual research organisations and the different ministries that
contribute to the research budget.
33
Projet de loi de Finances 2003.
34
Due to visibility matters, the RTD budget of universities is not fully included in the BCRD.
France
156
3.2.3.1
Pluri-annual contracts between State and public research institutions
•
Assessed every 4 years between the State and each individual university, the
pluri-annual contracts describe the strategy of each establishment in terms of
research, education, human resources and international policy. The public funding
is allocated according to the university’s priorities. The research projects are
evaluated either by the University Scientific Mission (MSU) of the Ministry of
National Education and Research, or by the corresponding EPST in case of
research partnerships. This scientific evaluation determines whether project will
be financed.
35
•
EPST’s and EPIC’s objectives and actions contracts are defining, every 6 years,
the establishment’s objectives (in terms of themes and partnerships), its scientific
priorities, its management (human resources, evaluation, information systems,
valorisation), and the engagements of State and establishment. Financial and
human resource budgeting is however done yearly within the framework of the
annual Finance Law.
3.2.3.2
FNS and FRT
•
The National Science Fund (FNS-Fonds National de la Science) was created in
2000, and shall impulse research in priority fields, and promote concerted actions
between publics laboratories.
•
The Technological Research Fund (FRT-Fonds de la Recherche Technologique)
aims at developing basic research effort of enterprises and theirs partnerships with
public laboratories. The FRT has recently been reoriented towards SMEs.
Both funds are granted with around 200 M
€
annually (though budget cuts may change
this at present). It should be noted however that both funds do not constitute two
single programmes but each is simply a general pot out of which individual types of
actions can be funded. Hence most of the FNS funding is going into different
“incentive concerted actions” (see below) and around 70% of the FRT’s budgets is
dedicated to the 16 different Research and technological innovation networks (RRIT-
Réseaux de recherche et d’innovation technologique)
3.2.3.3
Incentive Concerted Actions (ACI-Actions concertées incitatives)
ACIs, implemented by the Ministry of Research, are seen as a complement to public
research organisations’ actions and support public research teams. ACIs have 3 main
objectives:
•
support structuring actions in specific disciplinary field
•
encourage experts communities to work together in interdisciplinary operations
•
promote young researchers bearing projects
ACIs are funded mainly through the FNS (see infra) and managed by a director,
assisted by a scientific council. Several actions are led in co-ordination with the
Research and Technological innovation networks (RRIT-Réseaux de recherche et
d’innovation technologique), financed through the FRT, or with research and
innovation support systems of Europe and of other ministries. The most recent ACIs
are led together with EPST and/or EPIC.
ACIs are based on calls for proposals.
35
The contractualisation policy is currently being evaluated.
France
157
4
Brief description of NNE RTD organisation
4.1
Main actors
The following figure presents the main actors of the French NNE RTD system.
Universities are not represented, because no data is available on their RTD in NNE.
Exhibit 4-1 Main French NNE RTD actors
Nuclear energy
Non-nuclear energy
Beneficiaries
of the research
funding
Research
funders
CEA
ADEME
IFP
IFREMER
TFE
PSA
Renault
EDF
GDF
•Ministry of
environment
•Ministry of
research
CSTB
INRETS
•Ministry of
industry
BRGM
CNRS
100%
100%
Research funders
ADEME : National Energy and
Environment Management
Agency
Public research organisations
IFP : National Oil Institute
IFREMER : French Research Institute for
Exploitation of the Sea
BRGM : Geological and Mining Research
Office
CSTB : Scientific and technical Building
Centre
CNRS : National Centre of Scientific
Research
INRETS : National Institute of Research on
Transports
Private organisations
GDF : Gas of France
EDF : Electricity of France
TFE : TotalFinaElf
PSA : Peugeot S.A.
Legend
4.1.1
Ministries
4.1.1.1
Ministry of Youth, National Education and Research
Ministry in charge of research, Direction of Technology - Department energy,
transports, environment and natural resources
Position: the Ministry’s role is to facilitate RTD not to determine R&D priorities very
precisely. Nevertheless sets of themes are put forward, with a general orientation on
energy management and consumption, i.e.
France
158
•
hydrogen path, including fuel cells
•
CO2 management (also in complement with hydrogen if produced from
hydrocarbons)
•
new and renewable energies : photovoltaic, geothermics ,wind (off-shore),
biomass (agricultural biofuels), thermic energy
•
energy control (through hydrogen path, energy savings, storage, distribution)
4.1.1.2
Ministry of Economy, Finance and Industry
Ministry of industry: the General Direction of energy and raw materials
The strategic orientation of the MINEFI evolved from, 5 years ago, energy
independence, to, today, a focus on greenhouse gases and the diversification of the
energy mix (i.e. not to depend on a single energy path, like the nuclear one).
DGEMP funds the following programmes (see below for explanation)
•
CEA’s NTE Programme (see below)
•
RTPG (even if the ANVAR manages the network), however the DGEMP does not
select the projects funded by the RTPG : the Ministry of Research is in charge of
this selection, in accordance with the DGEMP policy
4.1.1.3
Ministry of Environment and Sustainable Development
This Ministry does not directly fund RTD on non-nuclear energy, but promotes its
general objectives to the actors of the NNE RTD:
•
effort is to be directed towards energies that are not producing greenhouse gas,
and that can replace nuclear energy
•
promotion of energy saving
•
promotion of every tool allowing to reduce greenhouse emissions in a global
assessment (CO2 capitalisation in agriculture…), along the whole energy cycle
•
promotion of integrated research, in consortia
This is mostly done in collaboration with ADEME. The Ministry of environment is
taking part to the negotiations of the State/ADEME Contract.
The Ministry is in particular interested in hydrogen: mainly hydrogen production,
carbon storage.
4.1.1.4
Ministry of Equipment and Transports
The ministry of equipment and transport is one of the government departments for the
PREDIT programme relating to land transport. The energy aspects within this
programme are however mainly funded by the ADEME.
4.1.2
ADEME, the French energy and environment management agency
ADEME is the public agency devoted to the support to energy and environment RTD
activities of public and private actors. The agency tries to foster innovation within
what it calls socio-technical networks,
36
by bringing together the different parties
36
For an outline see for instance SENSER report, European Commission, March 1998.
France
159
involved with technical innovations in the energy field (research institutes, firms,
users, regulation, local authorities, etc.). The Agency tries to improve and strengthen
the relationships between the different parties by identifying strengths and
weaknesses in such networks and putting concrete actions against identified
weaknesses.
ADEME is funded by different ministries (“ministères de tutelle”).
Exhibit 4-2 ADEME’s resources per origin in M
€
Year Total
Ministry of
Research
Ministry of
Environment
Ministry of
Industry
External
resources
296
21
225
38
12
2001
100%
7%
76%
13%
4%
342
10
248
31
53
2002
100%
3%
72,5%
9%
15,5%
ADEME - Annual reports 2001 and 2002
Exhibit 4-3 ADEME’s R&D budgets per origin in M
€
Year Total
BCRD
Ministry of
Environment
Ministry of
Industry
Others
51,4
17,4
25,9
4,5
3,6
2000
100%
34%
51%
8%
7%
53,4
16,8
27,8
5,1
3,7
2001
100%
32%
52%
10%
6%
ADEME - R&D Activity report 2000-2001
Concerning NNE, ADEME is focusing on
•
Rational Use of Energy (RUE)
•
New and renewable energies (ENR)
ADEME is organised in 3 programmes :
•
energy and greenhouse effect
•
pollution and nuisances
•
wastes
Exhibit 4-4 ADEME’s R&D budget per programme in M
€
2000
2001
2002
Energy and greenhouse
27,3
30,1
31,3
Pollution and nuisances
16,3
15,5
17,8
Wastes
7,8
7,8
8,0
TOTAL
51,4
53,4
57,1
ADEME - R&D Activity report 2000-2001 and Activity Report 2002
In these three programmes the energy concern can be both specific (the Energy and
Greenhouse effect Programme) and transversal (there are many interfaces with the
two other programmes).
The following exhibit presents an overview of the Energy and Greenhouse effect
Programme, every specific action area being linked to key actions.
France
160
Exhibit 4-5 Energy and Greenhouse effect Programme : overview
37
Key actions
M
€
Specific areas
Reduction of energy
carbon content
17,31
•
Renewables
•
Hydrogen paths
•
Energy storage (electricity and heat)
Energetic efficiency and
demand control
5,75
•
Transport sector
•
Industry sector
•
Building – Tertiary sector
Reduction of greenhouse
gas in industrial processes
3,9
•
Advanced combustion
•
Chemical specification and capture
•
Others greenhouse gas
CO2 sequestration
•
Transport
•
Storage : technical feasibility, environmental
control, acceptability
Impact and control of
greenhouse gas emissions
from agricultural practices
and organic wastes
1,12
•
Biogas valorisation
•
Agricultural emissions control (carbon cycle and
nitrogen)
•
Biosequestration and biomaterials
Social sciences and
humanities
2,03
•
Sociology
•
Economy
•
Law and institutions
ADEME - R&D Activity report 2000-2001
The budgets of every key action are illustrated in the following figure.
Exhibit 4-6 Energy and greenhouse Programme : budget per key action in M
€
,
2001
17,31
5,75
3,9
1,12
2,03
Reduction of energy carbon content
Energetic efficiency and demand control
Reduction of greenhouse gas in industrial processes
Greenhouse gas control / Sequestration / biological cycles
Social sciences and humanities
ADEME - R&D Activity report 2000-2001
37
See the R&D Activity report for more precise information on the programme (detailed research
topics per strategic axis).
France
161
4.1.3
Public research and technology organisations
4.1.3.1
CNRS
The CNRS is Europe’s biggest public research organisation, counting around 25 000
staff of which around 11 000 are scientists and engineers. CNRS still has some own
laboratories, however most of researchers are working in joint laboratories with,
mainly, universities (UMR’s, Unité Mixte de Recherche). Therefore in an
international perspective CNRS is often compared to a research
council
rather than
being a research organisation “having its own walls.”
In 2000 CNRS has developed an interdisciplinary programme on Energy, involving 7
out if its 8 Scientific Departments.
38
After the oil crisis of 1973 and 1979, the CNRS
established programmes on new energy sources. But, with the decrease of the oil
prices, funding for such programmes also decreased. From 1988 to 1997 (Kyoto
Protocol), the preoccupation with greenhouse gas emission led to new thoughts on
renewables.
39
The CNRS decided then to set up a structured action on energy, with
the objective of the Kyoto Protocol: to reduce greenhouse gas emission to the level of
1990 in 2010.
The priorities of this Programme are
•
to better control energy demand and production in housing and transports
•
to remove the technological locks of mid- and long-term
The Programme emphasises socio-economic research and Hydrogen related research.
Priorities were inspired by main 2 concerns :
•
Energy independence: according to national scenario exercises, France is expected
to undergo an energy crisis in 15 years, amongst other things related to the age of
the nuclear park (most of nuclear reactors having been built in quite short period
of time); energy independence must be maintained or searched for, especially for
transports and housing
•
Reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, through renewables, fuel cells, carbon
sequestration and energy efficiency
In terms of time horizon, the research programme aims the:
•
mid-term : 15-20 years, where the industry support is expected
•
long-term : 20-50 years, where radical technological change may be needed for
which today no solutions exist
The programme concentrates on the following themes :
•
renewables (photovoltaic, biomass, geothermal, thermal solar) for heat
production, for fuel in transports and for electricity production
•
new energy vectors : electricity, hydrogen, heat (production, storage, transport)
•
improvement of classic energetic process for energy efficiency or emission
treatment matters
38
CNRS, Rapport d’activité 2002.
39
See Claude Birraux, Jean-Yves Le Déaut,
Rapport sur l’état actuel et les perspectives techniques
des énergies renouvelables
, OPECST, 2001.
France
162
•
socio-economic research on energy
These themes have been defined after the constitution of working groups (CNRS,
other research organisations, and frequently industrial actors), charged to draw up the
national and international state of the art, in order to identify unexplored thematic and
adapt the choices to France
40
.
In 2002, the Programme financing
41
was of 1,524 M
€
, only from CNRS (this data is
to be related to the CNRS total budget : of 2 154 M
€
in 2002)
42
. In 2003, this
financing tripled due to the participation of Ministry of Research (through an ACI),
ADEME and the Ministry of Defence’s DGA (General Armament Direction)
43
:
•
CNRS for 2M
€
•
Ministry of Research for 1M
€
•
DGA for 1,4M
€
Being incentive funding only, an estimate of the consolidated budget of the
Programme (i.e. including salaries, overheads, etc.), can be obtained by multiplication
by a factor 10. Hence in 2003, the Programme can be said to represent around 44M
€
in terms of total cost.
Around 700 researchers from the CNRS are involved in the Programme (not everyone
is in full time).
The Programme is supervised by a steering committee, composed of 12 personalities
from CNRS and the Ministry of Research. Calls for proposals are launched every
year, with the objectives of favouring partnerships with other public research
organisations and with industrial companies, and of bringing closer interdisciplinary
competencies.
44
The success rate in these calls lies around 1/3.
The following exhibit shows the general objectives of the Programme per priority. It
is to be noted that some objectives may also concern nuclear RTD but this cannot
easily be separated out.
40
See
www.imp.CNRS.fr/energie
41
It has not been possible to know the share devoted to NNE.
42
CNRS, Rapport d’activité 2002.
43
Bernard Spinner,
Pourquoi un programme Energie au CNRS ?,
Le journal du CNRS n° 389,
2003.
44
www.cnrs.fr/DEP/prg/Energie.html
France
163
Exhibit 4-7 Overview of CNRS Energy Programme
Axis
M
€
Themes
General objectives
Biomass
Biomass production ; gasification, enzymatic
processes (fuels, biogas) ; cogeneration
Solar energy
Photovoltaic : thin layers ; polymers ; 3
rd
generation
(nanostructures)
Thermic : housing ; thermochemicals ; thermic
electricity
New energetic
resources
Geothermics
Hydrogen
Fuel cells
Housing or industrial heat
Production
PEMFC-SOFC (electrolytes, electrodes, systems)
Electricity
New concepts : networks, composings, storage
Heat
New concepts : recuperation, transformation,
heat/refrigeration production, storage, long distance
transport
Control of
energetic
vectors
Hydrogen
Storage, transport, safety
Combustion
Motors, boilers
Wastes, biomass – synthetic gas and cogeneration,
safety
Industrial process
Optimisation (safety, quality, energetic efficiency) in
transformation industries : agro-food, iron and steel
metallurgy ; industrial refrigeration
Heat exchangers
Exchange optimisation, multi-scales systems,
multiprocessing, combined processes
Housing
Bioclimatic housing : new isolators, thermic inertia
Couplings : new solar captors / surface geothermics /
heat pump ; biomass ; photovoltaic
Clean,
economical
and
performing
processes,
and
environment
Waste
Greenhouse gas
Emissions treatment, effluents ; nuclear wastes
Capture, treatment, destruction
Demand determinants Economic and social acceptability
Models and data
Taking developing countries into consideration
New institutional
environment and
regulation
Standards and legislation
Socio-
economics
Innovation diffusion
Security, economic
and social safety
Industrial property
www.imp.CNRS.fr/energie
4.1.3.2
CEA
The Atomic Energy Commission (Commissariat à l’Energie Atomique) has, also
since 2000, been leading an RTD programme on “New Energy Technologies” (NTE),
therewith explicitly leaving the “nuclear-only” vision practiced so far.
Before this programme was launched, CEA’s R&D activities included technology
areas like solar energy, fuel cell, hydrogen… but without any attempt to overall
structuring. With NTE this changed and 3 priorities were defined
•
Energy carriers: hydrogen and fuel cells (production, storage, conversion)
•
Photovoltaic as a full path, as a system; energy storage as a full system, in both
cases reaching comparative cost-effectiveness being the main objective
•
Energy efficiency and thermal/housing, mainly through hybridisation of energy
sources (photovoltaic, biomass…). RTD activities here are in strong interaction
with the GRETh (Research Group on Thermic Exchangers, set up in the 1980s by
France
164
ADEME’s predecessor AFME), a consortium of industrial companies relating
heat exchangers of all sorts
These priorities have been chosen after the evaluation of the current competencies of
CEA laboratories. This evaluation showed that the CEA had many competencies
related to ‘new energy technologies’ in-house, but this was not explicitly organised
and therefore not integrated. For example, LETI, a major laboratory concentrating on
micro- and nano-technologies has competencies in polymers that could be used in
photovoltaic cells; but these two issues were not naturally connected within CEA. The
Programme introduced a structuring of activities, and a rationalisation whilst explicit
choices were made on the RTD to support as indicated above.
It is important to note that the RTD activities in the Programme do no longer have to
be based on nuclear RTD; for example, RTD on biomass gasification for hydrogen
production, one of the themes within the programme, is exempt of nuclear energy
aspects.
The CEA is also teaming up with industrial companies in its RTD projects, both for
national, European and international partnerships
In 2004, the NTE Programme is planned to involve 290 people, among which
•
174 on hydrogen and fuel cells
•
81 on photovoltaic and energy storage
•
35 on energy efficiency
The total budget of the Programme is of 32,8 M
€
for 2004.
4.1.3.3
IFP and RTPG
The
French Petroleum Institute
(IFP- Institut français du pétrole) has a particular
status: it is a private research institute, but under the “tutelle” (supervision) of the
Ministry of Industry. The contract 2001-2007 with the State is the third one, but for
the first time the budgetary donation (since 2003 of 200 M
€
) is listed in the BCRD
(see above). Before 2003, IFP was financed directly by a tax on oil products (TIPP),
but this practice was stopped through European directive. In 2001, IFP budget was of
278 M
€
.
45
About one third of that budget comes from contracts or subsidiaries’ dividends, and
returns on participation in firms: in France, the legislation authorises a public body to
have private status subsidiaries (for technology transfers, for example). Concerning
IFP, many RTD projects are led with its subsidiaries (like Axens).
IFP’s RTD covers the whole oil ad gas sector: from exploration to refining and to
utilisation. It is an institute with a good reputation even though France has itself only
limited oil and gas resources.
RTD projects are of two sorts :
45
Projet de loi de finances 2003.
France
165
•
Basic (‘upstream’) research, the objective of which is to make sure that the
institute’s competencies are State-of-the-Art. This research is mainly done in
collaboration with other public research institutes: CNRS, INRA (on biofuels),
universities, IFREMER…, and internationally
•
Industry-oriented research covering the lion’s share, i.e. 80% of IFP’s RTD
Programmes are either pluri-annual or annual, but are in any case revised every year.
The Contract with the State is put in quite generic terms and therefore actually does
not determine the effective priorities of the Institute. Most of the programmes are set
up in dialogue with industry and its needs.
Exhibit 4-8 RTD in IFP: overview (2002)
Programme
M
€
Strategic axis
Exploration/
Exploration of new oil territories
Oilfields
Evaluation of oil systems
Improved oil recuperation
Oilfield monitoring
60
(25%)
Environment
Sinking/
Production in complex tanks
Production
Ultra-deep sinking and production
34
(14%)
Treatment and transport of oil effluents
Refining/
Petrochemistry
Industrial projects : refining, petrochemistry, gas and other
energies (production of hydrogen or synthetic gas)
Competencies acquisition projects : catalyse, analyse,
thermodynamics and separations, development of processes
and inorganic materials
Worktools projects
82
(34%)
Prestations projects
Motors/Energy
Combustion
Optimisation of the motors/fuels system
Electronic control
Reduction of pollution and nuisances
41
(17%)
Industrial thermic
TOTAL
217
IFP Annual Report 2002
The total budget in 2002 was of 241,1 M
€
, but this also covers training (the IFP runs
the national “Petroleum and Engine School”), information and valorisation activities.
IFP participates to ADEME’s AGRICE
46
group, concerning biomass and biofuel
RTD
Concerning hydrogen, as from the 1960s IFP worked on the development of fuel cells
for automobiles but, confronted to storage and electrochemical problems, this
programme was stopped at the beginning of the 1980s. Since 4 years IFP has been
working on hydrogen production related to CO2 capture and sequestration, for 2 main
reasons:
46
The scientific interest group AGRICE (initially an incentive programme), Agriculture for
Chemicals and Energy, focuses on new uses and enhanced value for agricultural products and
byproducts as energy, chemical and materials feedstocks. AGRICE is committed to coordinating,
funding, monitoring and evaluating research and development programmes that further these
goals. See www.ademe.fr/partenaires/agrice for more information.
France
166
•
the establishment of the national hydrogen research network (PACO, see below)
•
the change of vision within the international oil industry about the end of the
fossil fuel era, as well as a concern about greenhouse gas emissions
The
Research network on oil and gas technologies
(RTPG-
Réseau de recherche sur
les technologies pétrolières et gazières
) allocates funding to firms having RTD
programmes on hydrocarbons exploitation/production and on oil refining.
In 2001, 114 projects have been selected, associating in total 67 industrial partners.
IFP is leading 25% of them.
The RTPG is managed by ANVAR, the national agency for research valorisation.
Exhibit 4-9 Funding by RTPG per thematic, in M
€
, 2001
Thematic
Amount
Marine exploitation
15 650
Natural Gas
47
2 134
Geology - geophysics
11 065
Wells (sinking)
4 090
Refining (utilisation)
1 709
TOTAL
34 678
Projet de loi de Finances 2003
This network has lead to the creation of a national platform in which oil and gas
actors can meet and exchange, allowing the development of a powerful para-
petroleum industry.
4.1.3.4
BRGM
The Geological and Mining Research Office (BRGM-Bureau de recherches
géologiques et minières) is an EPIC under the supervision of the Ministries of
Industry and Research. In the energy field, the Office has programmes in partnership
with IFP on geothermal energy and CO2 sequestration.
The organisation is also the French lead partner of the deep geothermal energy
programme of Soultz (Hot dry rock technology).
4.1.3.5
Universities
It has appeared impossible to determine the energy budget of universities. The
Ministry of Research evaluates that circa 500 university researchers are working on
energy-related issues ; in terms of wages (university researchers are paid by the State)
this would represent around 50 M
€
per annum.
4.1.3.6
Other
The following research institutes are marginally working on NNE issues:
•
IFREMER
(French Research Institute for Exploitation of the Sea), an EPST, is
engaged mainly on research actions on marine wind energy, or, with IFP, on off-
shore sinking.
47
Mainly transportation.
France
167
•
INRETS
, an EPST, is engaged in PREDIT.
•
Technical Centers
such as CETIAT (aerolic and thermic industries) or CETIM
(mecanical industry), but also the
CSTB
(Scientific and technical Building
Centre), are playing a role on RTD in housing (R&D on energy demand : in
construction…).
•
LCPC
(Laboratoire des Ponts et Chaussées)
4.1.4
Companies
We will here focus on EDF and GDF, even if many French firms (Air Liquide,
TotalFinaElf…) are conducting NNE RTD projects.
4.1.4.1
EDF
The total research budget of EDF is of 381M
€
48
, including 95M
€
for the protection of
the environment. Nuclear energy represents 44% of the total RTD budget, and about
25% of the research concerns fossil-fired power plants, hydroelectricity, renewable
energies and networks i.e. 95,25M
€
. Moreover, EDF launched in 2002 a 50M
€
five
years research program aiming at developping renewable energy sources.
The NNE R&D activities are governed by the Group strategies, supported by the
R&D Division :
•
Fossil-fuel power plants : RTD mainly concerns “clean coal”, and projects are
focused on the “Best Available Techniques” (BAT), in particular in terms of
protection of the environment : desulfurization, denitrification, reduction of
particulates emissions, CO2 captation and storage, reduction of atmospheric
pollution, re-utilization of ashes, etc …)
•
Hydraulic energy RTD is important for EDF because the company operates a
large number of French dams : the objectives are to lower the exploitation costs
and to optimise water management (pollution, environment...)
•
Biomass RTD : the research mainly aims at improving co-combustion in thermal
power stations. R&D Division is also involved in an European project called
RENEW
•
Concerning solar energy, with the help of ADEME, EDF has launched, with
CNRS, a research program on photovoltaic cells. The issues are the increase of
cost-effectiveness and overcoming of technological barriers
•
A large RTD program is also running on fuel cells (stationary and for vehicules).
Studies on heat pumps, RES in the buildings and houses, … are also performed
•
Wind farms are studied from the point of view of their technical performances,
meteo forecasting, and inclusion on the grid
•
New techniques related to marine current turbines are also investigated
•
EDF is also very much involved in the deep geothermal project of Soultz-la-Forêt
with other European partners
•
Finally, with the help of ADEME, EDF performs RTD on energetic efficiency and
electricity demand control
48
EDF Annual Report 2003.
France
168
4.1.4.2
GDF
49
The Research and Development Division conducts R&D projects in all gas related
areas for the GDF group ranging from gas production, transport and distribution to
end use.
696 researchers are working in the Research Direction of GDF. The total budget of
the Direction was in 2002 of 74,5M
€
50
.
Main research areas include:
•
Upstream: Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG), gas networks (pipelines, corrosion ,
treatment and metering)
•
The use of gas in industrial processes (glass making, metallurgy, and agribusiness
especially)
•
Everyday gas use: combustion and burners, heating, hot water and cooking
•
Innovative techniques: air-conditioning, cogeneration , fuel cells , and Natural
Gas Vehicles (NGVs)
•
Miscellaneous areas: statistics, economics, sociology and the environment
Both EDF and GDF will in term be privatised. It is not clear which consequences this
may have for RTD, although the trend that can be observed abroad indicates that
generally RTD investments are decreased at privatisation.
5
Current NNE RTD priorities relevant for ERA in NNE RTD
5.1
Figures
Exhibit 5-1 Total government expenditures for energy R&D, per thousand
units of GDP
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
Budget on energy
R&D including
nuclear research
0,45
0,42
0,42
0,38
0,43
0,40
0,39
0,41
0,46
Budget on NNE R&D
0,06
0,05
0,05
0,04
0,04
0,04
0,03
0,03
0,04
Source: IEA annual report, 2000
49
http://innovation.gazdefrance.com/public/php/accueil.php?langue=en
50
GDF, Annual Report 2002.
France
169
Exhibit 5-2 Government R&D budgets per NNE technology area, in million
US$ at 1999 prices and exchange rates
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
Conservation
19,2
18,6
12,1
8,1
7,9
7,1
4,6
6,5
12,3
Oil and gas
37,8
36,2
33,6
33,5
32,1
31,6
31,2
30,9
30,7
Coal
5,5
5,4
5,6
5,5
5,6
5,2
5,1
0,1
-
Renewables
8
7,8
5,7
5,3
5,2
5,0
3,0
4,1
13,3
Energy systems analysis
and others
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Source: IEA annual report, 2000
IEA does not take in account the R&D of EDF (Electricity of France) and GDF (Gas
of France), considering those two institutions as private. The IEA data for France are
gathered and processed by the Ministry of Industry – Department of Energy and Raw
Materials. The Department is confronted to many counting problems, especially the
fact that the R&D in university laboratories is not referenced.
5.2
Energy issues are strongly linked to environment
In the BCRD the line “Energy” represents 6,4% of total research budgets; however
energy funding can furthermore be found under “Environment and sustainable”,
“Materials” or “Transports” budget lines. It is therefore difficult to determine exactly
from the BCRD how much is effectively allocated to energy RTD, and even more so
in the case of NNE RTD (nuclear energy seems to count for a huge share of the
former 6,4%).
In the “Projet de loi de finances 2003”, it is quite interesting to see that Energy and
Environment themes are treated in the same chapter, and then even mostly through
environmental concerns. The PACO network related to fuel cells (see below) only
appears in the Materials chapter. The Ministry of Industry is probably the only
ministry to consider energy also from the supply side of view, as energy
per se
.
5.3
Two national “research networks” relate to NNE RTD
RRITs are support tools to RTD; 16 RRITs are existing today in France, their goal is
to improve collaboration between the public and private research, from SMEs to
MNEs.
The networks are not incentive research programmes in the traditional sense of the
word, but labelling procedures. Labelled projects are eventually co-funded by the
Ministry in charge of Research, through the FRT, and also by other ministries and
agencies.
Two Research and technological innovation networks (RRITs) in France are related
to NNE: PACO and PREDIT.
•
PACO (“
P
iles
A
CO
mbustibles”) is the RRITs focusing on fuel cell research,
created in June 1999. Its goal is to improve public/private research co-operation in
fuel cells, from production to utilisation in transport or stationary applications
(production of heat and electricity). The network is funded by the Ministries of
Research, Industry, Transports, by ADEME and by ANVAR (the French Agency
of research valorisation) : the public funding has been of 32M
€
in 3 years (when
the network was launched, only 7,62M
€
of public funding were supposed to be
France
170
devoted to it for the same period of time). The network is facilitated by ADEME
and CEA.
Its main themes are
−
performances and behaviour of components
−
core of cell (electrodes…)
−
fuel alimentation of cell
−
hydrogen production and storage
−
systemic studies
−
safety
−
socio-economic evaluation of the different paths
−
development perspectives of hydrogen path
•
PREDIT (Research and Innovation Programme in Terrestrial Transports)
associates the Ministries of Research, Transports, Industry and Sustainable
Development, by ADEME and by ANVAR. The network has been allocated 305
M
€
for the period 2002-2006
51
. Some research themes of PREDIT are concerning
NNE RTD.
Finally it should be mentioned that a Committee on New Energy Technologies
reflects on the way to improve support to promote New Energy Technologies, i.e.
renewables (wind, thermal solar and photovoltaic, geothermics, sea energy, biomass
and biofuels), hydrogen, fuel cells, heat exchangers… Also, inspired by the
aforementioned CEA programme, a creation of a new network on New Energy
Technologies is under discussion by the Ministry of Research.
6
Description of Priority setting process
6.1
Two main objectives: reducing greenhouse gas emissions and
promote a new energetic mix
It has been 4 or 5 years by now that the problem area concerning ‘energy’ is as a
matter of fact defined according to the greenhouse effect: this is obvious in the
Ministries of Research and Environment, ADEME, CEA, but also IFP, EDF… Some
interviewees however indicate that such a definition incorporates the risk of loss of
energy technology related research competence per se.
This notwithstanding, one can thus say that most of current RTD priorities in France
are influenced by the Kyoto Protocol and the necessary limitation of greenhouse gas
emissions. In France, CO2 production has increased despite the implementation of the
nuclear programme in the 1970’s. According to our interlocutor in CEA, this increase
can be explained by the use at 95% of fossil fuels in transports. Transport represents
the 1/4 of France’s oil importation.
For example in CEA, the responsible for the NTE Programme is very concerned by
environmental issues. The NNE RTD actions of CEA are explicitly oriented towards
the objective given by the Kyoto Protocol. Transport and housing are the 2 major
51
Projet de loi de finances 2003.
France
171
contributors to greenhouse effect, so the actions of the NTE Programme are oriented
towards it.
This objective can also be linked with the energy efficiency preoccupation.
The second main objective is to promote a new energetic mix, reducing the share of
traditional energies: nuclear, coal and hydrocarbons.
6.2
The relationships between public research organisations, ADEME,
and supervision (‘tutelle’) ministries, in priority setting processes
The main instrument of government is incentive actions. The Ministries are defining
general orientations. The main tools of the Ministry of Research are the National
Science Fund and the Technological Research Fund discussed above. However the
FRT is mainly devoted to the funding of the networks (RRITs). There is no strong
strategic planning in energy RTD, as it was present for nuclear energy in the 1970’s.
However the governmental level can identify key actions to be sustained, initiatives
taken by public research organisms, and can try to structure such actions. For example
the CIRST (Interministerial comittee for scientific and technological research) issued
in June 1999 research priorities, among them energy. The main priority in energy was
the creation of a technological network on fuel cells (leading to the constitution of the
PACO network).
In sum, in the French NNE RTD field the research community de facto defines the
research priorities and there is little top down steering.
We have seen that the relationships between supervision (‘tutelle’) ministries and
EPSTs and EPICs are defined in contracts (so-called “contrats d’objectifs”), discussed
every 6 years. An assessment is done at mid term. Each individual organisation
proposes the ministries an overall RTD Programme, elaborated mainly by its
Direction and its Scientific Council according to the recommendations of the
programme managers. The ministries allocate overall funding to the organisation. The
Contracts are followed-up through “meeting points” in time. Nevertheless these
contracts are purely formal since they apply at a very general level only and do not
much go into detail. Therefore, decisions concerning effective RTD priorities are
made within the organisations. A Contract represents only general RTD lines, that can
be eventually re-defined halfway considering RTD results. For example, ADEME’s
Research Programme, inscribed in the Contract 2000-2006, has been re-oriented
following a change in the Direction ; the new Programme is then integrated in the
Contract, on the occasion of the mid-term assessment. Finally even though an overall
sum is indicated, the contract with the research organisations do not signify a strong
budgetary engagement since budgets remain defined annually.
6.3
Importance given to scientific evaluation of projects
6.3.1
Programme evaluation
Every RTD activity is scientifically evaluated at least every 3 years. EPSTs are
performing their own evaluation of RTD projects (including those in partnership with
France
172
universities, ADEME, CEA…). One call to tender is usually renewed during 2 or 3
years. Concerning ACI’s, as projects are funded for 3 years, they are scientifically
evaluated every 3 years and at mid term. An ACI can be continued if the ex-post
evaluation is satisfactory, it can be translated in a new set of themes or, partly, in new
ACIs. The evaluation of the RITTs (PACO, PREDIT…) has so far been left very
much to the initiative of the individual secretariats: the previous PREDIT programme
was evaluated at mid-term and by the end of the programme; PACO underwent only a
technical evaluation to assess the relevance of the research it promotes.
Concerning more finalised organisations (IFP, ADEME), ‘evaluation’ is often de
facto performed by assessing, eventually, industrial returns of projects. EDF R&D is
currently developing a methodology to evaluate the value it creates in terms of Group
earnings (estimation of net actual value). This is the same for the Ministry of
Environment where a programme is most often judged successful if it has lead to
research results, to what in French is called “valorisation.”
More structured evaluation practices may appear in future with the new finance law
that takes effect in 2006 and that is based on the definition of programmes with as
much as possible quantified objectives and the evaluation of the effectiveness of these
programmes.
6.3.2
Other RTD support activities
Foresight, ex-ante evaluation or impact assessment, are not very explicitly used in the
priority setting process or more generally to guide political decision making.
Relevance of decisions is mostly “evaluated” from the results of the project or
priority: scientific and technological production, “success”… The decision is related,
most of the time, to the current economic/scientific/technological climate. For
example, the launch on RTD activities on biofuels 10 years ago was motivated by the
high cost of oil barrel, by the fallow issue, by the perspective of the European
Agricultural Policy… Currently, RTD activities on hydrogen and fuel cell are said to
be in relation to the necessity of reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
The Ministry of Industry is using a guide of key technologies to be supported,
published by ADIT (
www.adit.fr)
, the Agency for the diffusion of technological
information. This document used to be the reference for any support action from the
Ministry (arrow credits to ADEME, CEA, RTPG… for example on fuel cells).
A current initiative has also to be mentioned: FutuRIS, a foresight exercise involving
many actors of the French RTD field, on the national research and innovation system
to improve in the future.
Concerning ADEME’s RTD support activities, 3 observations can be made:
•
It relies firmly on socio-economic networks : partners of a project are consulted
every year on next year’s orientations, from past year’s assessment. This is also
done at the end of a project : an evaluation is conducted, partners are gathered and
future actions are redefined
•
ADEME does not usually lead market studies, considering it can rely on its
industrial and private partners. However, if a network is not well-structured,
France
173
ADEME can launch a study; it has been done for example on innovation in
individual wood heating
•
ADEME does not perform much technical project monitoring: as ADEME is not
in charge of the research itself the Agency finds it difficult. It has nevertheless
carried out evaluation of past programmes, and in 2000 a meta-evaluation of 10
years of NNE RTD (1985-1995) funded by the agency and its predecessor AFME
was performed at the request of the ADEME.
In general, the energy agency ADEME does not dispose of of an all encompassing
“forward-looking” activity that would allow to set overall priorities. However there
do exist individual model studies, expert groups, market analysis, impact assessments,
etc. to guide individual pieces of research or research programmes…
CEA on the contrary has recently performed a major foresight, for two reasons
•
The supervision ministries have asked the CEA to set up a mid- and long-term
plan (PMLT), to define the evolution of CEA’s missions from 2003 to 2012. The
PMLT is currently in negotiation between the supervision ministries and the CEA.
•
The NNE RTD support activities in CEA are multifold and had to be tied together
in some way
−
Marketing studies : what are the markets, at what cost the technologies will be interesting for
industrials. CEA has got a special team for that activity
−
Involvement of firms that are doing active technology watch, to have a state of the art and the
positioning of CEA on a certain market
−
An international relay system with units present in Washington, Korea, Japan, Canada, and to
the European Commission
−
Every year a mid-term plan is organised (PMT, 4-5 years); thematic workshops are set up,
gathering CEA researchers, allowing to select interest matters. Then a 2-days meeting is
organised, where a general framework is given, in order to mobilise different competencies,
allowing to better structure CEA’s offer in this problem area. In 2003 the theme for example
was thermal/housing. A document is published, diffused to every CEA laboratory, summing-
up the discussions and the workshops and declining programmatic directives informing
research units on what the Programme could develop in the year to come. Next, units propose
projects and partnerships, sometimes unexpected ones. In 2003, 90 people came to such an
annual meeting, some of which were not involved in the NTE Programme. The idea is also to
increasingly motivate persons previously involved with nuclear research to propose NTE
projects
−
CEA organises thematic roadmaps
−
In 2003 a scientific evaluation of the NTE Programme was set up and all participating
laboratories will be evaluated every 3 years by external experts
6.4
Priority setting process: the importance of networks (formal and
informal)
The interviews has show the importance of formal and informal relationships in the
definition of NNE RTD priorities:
•
The Ministry of Research has defined its priorities through the discussion between
the Ministry Heads of Departments, the Ministry Directors, but also with its
partners in public research and industrial research (Renault, Peugeot, EDF…)
•
IFP has built a network on industrial partners, and the choice and management of
projects are more and more shared between the actors of the network
France
174
•
Programmes definition, projects evaluation, intermediary implementation and
animation (manifestations, colloquies…) involve ADEME and every partner of a
network. The research programme is discussed in the Scientific Council (CS) of
ADEME, on the basis of technological areas and of future challenges for society
(health, environment, culture…). The reflections on RTD orientations are made at
Scientific Directions and CS levels, but as well, regularly, with partners.
The importance of Scientific Councils in research organisations and agencies, as well
as “labelling networks” such as RRIT have to be noted. ADEME’s CS members
(although not representing their organisation) are from public research organisations
(CNRS, INSA
52
…), industry (wind, air treatment…), CSTB, AFNOR
(standardisation), OECD, INERIS
53
…). The composition of ADEME’s CS has to
respect an equilibrium between public and private sectors, and between the RTD
themes. In other words, the priority setting process in NNE RTD depends very much
on the multiple links of actors that as a matter of fact are very much entwined.
6.5
The Foresight exercise of ADEME, CEA and CNRS
ADEME, CEA and CNRS have recently set up a foresight exercise. This was
performed in May 2002, as a 6 years foresight. The Foresight exercise is in a way the
institutionalisation of former relations between the 3 organisationss. It was launched
following a request of the Ministry of Research’s Direction of Technology, asking
ADEME, CEA and CNRS to build up a multidisciplinary programme in energy, in
order to take a position in ERA. During the writing of the proposal, IFP joined the
team.
The actors have determined what key points could be developed together. Thirteen
key technologies were identified:
•
photovoltaic
•
thermic solar energy and thermodynamic
•
biomass thermochemical conversion processes
•
biomass / biofuels byhumid and enzymatic way
•
hydrogen production
•
hydrogen storage
•
fuel cells (PEMFC, DMFC, SOFC)
•
electricity management
•
electric storage
•
combustion processes
•
energy efficiency
•
greenhouse gas treatment
•
socio-economic research
For each technology a presentation has been elaborated, presenting the context, the
common points, and the concrete objectives (data, prototypes realisation, processes
demonstration, cost reduction…).
52
National Institute of Applied Sciences
53
National Institute of Industrial Environment and Risk
France
175
The choices have been made after a market analysis, the analysis of the positioning of
CEA and CNRS laboratories compared to European and international teams, and
following technological innovation potential analysis.
The exercise should have led to the allocation of new means, but given the change in
government followed by severe budget cuts in 2003, and probably continued in 2004,
not much progress could be made on the issue. The positive effect of the exercise is
however, in consultation with the Ministry of Research, the actors involved have
developed a common view on NNE RTD.
France
177
Annexe A
Acronyms
ACI
Incentive Concerted Actions
ADEME
Energy and Environment Management Agency
ANVAR
National agency for research valorisation
BCRD
Civil Budget for Research and Development
BRGM
Geological and Mining Research Office
CEA
Atomic Energy Commission
CIRED
International Research Centre on Environment and Development
CNRS
National Centre of Scientific Research
CSTB
Scientific and technical Building Centre
DGEMP
General Direction of energy and raw materials
EDF
Electricity of France
EPIC
Economically- and commercially-oriented Public Institution
EPST
Scientific and Technological Public Institution
ERA
European Research Area
FNS
National Science Fund
FP
Framework Programme
FRT
Technological Research Fund
GDF
Gas of France
IEA
International Energy Agency
IFP
National Oil Institute
IFREMER
French Research Institute for Exploitation of the Sea
INRETS
National Institute of Research on Transports
MEDD
Ministry of Environment and Sustainable Development
MEFI
Ministry of Economy, Finance and Industry
MJENR
Ministry of Youth, Education and Research
NNE
Non nuclear energy
NTE
New Energy Technologies
PACO
“Fuel Cell” network
PREDIT
Research and Innovation Programme in Surface Transports
RRIT
Research and Technological innovation networks
RTD
Research and Technical Development
RTPG
Research network on oil and gas technologies
SME
Small and medium enterprise
France
178
Annexe B
Bibliography
•
Bernard Spinner,
Pourquoi un programme Energie au CNRS ?,
Le journal du
CNRS n° 389, 2003.
•
Projet de loi de finances 2003.
•
ADEME, CEA, CNRS, Recherche et développement, Prospective recherche sur
l’énergie, mai 2002
•
CNRS, Activity report 2002.
•
GDF, Annual Report 2002.
•
IFP, Annual report 2002.
•
B. de Laat, K. Warta, La dynamique des réseaux technico-économiques “ENR &
URE” 1985-95 : Une méta-évaluation des interventions de l’ADEME,
Technopolis France, Paris, janvier 2001 .
•
ADEME, Activity report R&D, 2000-2001.
•
IEA, France report 2000
•
SENSER report, European Commission, March 1998.
Germany
179
Country study Germany
Germany
181
Contents:
1
Summary of country study indicating main points for synergy
183
2
Main points for collaboration, synergy, complementarity with regard to the
NNE RTD ERA
183
2.1
Necessary conditions for making ERA happen
183
2.2
Existing opportunities for ERA
185
2.2.1
Regional versus national actors in ERA
185
2.2.2
Thematic complementarities
185
2.2.3
Trans-border cooperations
186
2.2.4
Bilateral cooperation
186
2.2.5
Other international cooperations
187
2.2.6
The use of new cooperative instruments of the European Commission
187
2.3
Concrete possible policy actions
187
3
Short background information
188
3.1
The overall energy situation of Germany
188
3.1.1
Energy supply and energy production: phasing out nuclear power
188
3.1.2
Renewable energies
189
3.1.3
Main actors in energy policy
189
3.2
The national RTDI system
190
3.2.1
Research financing and research implementation
190
3.2.2
Institutional setting
193
4
Brief description of NNE RTD organisation
194
4.1
National funding of non-nuclear energy
194
4.1.1
National funding programmes
194
4.1.2
Quantitative overview of federal research budgets
194
4.2
Main actors (national and regional level)
196
4.2.1
Public Funding bodies on the federal level
197
4.2.2
Länder initiatives in non-nuclear energy research
198
4.2.3
Main research institutions involved in NNE-RTD
198
4.2.4
Forschungsverbände
200
4.3
Expected future evolution
201
5
Current NNE RTD priorities relevant for ERA in NNE RTD
202
6
Description of Priority setting process
203
7
References
205
Germany
183
1
Summary of country study indicating main points for
synergy
Germany undoubtedly plays a major role in European Research Area (ERA) in non-
nuclear energy research and technical development (NNE RTD), not only because of
its size but also because of the strength of its research institutions and the priority
Germany has given to NNE RTD in recent years.
This priority is in effect oriented not only towards renewables, but very explicitly
formulated in contrast to nuclear research, as Germany has taken the decision to phase
out nuclear power supply.
Cumulated financial support for research projects in 2003 by the federal ministries in
charge of NNE-RTD
54
amount to
€
152 million:
€
73 million for renewable energies,
€
79 million for rational use of energy and around
€
40 million basic funding for
renewable energies in the research centres of the Helmholtz Gemeinschaft.
55
A major tendency in recent research policy in Germany is related to the effort of
bundling competencies, recognising on the one hand the need for efficiency in a
context of tight research budgets, on the other hand the importance of complex
research problems calling for intra- and trans-disciplinary approaches. The
restructuring of the Helmholtz-Gemeinschaft and in particular of its energy research,
as well as the creation of national and regional research associations and networks
illustrate this effort.
Visibility of competencies is also regarded as a success factor of integration in
relations increasingly marked by a combination of competition and cooperation that
play a role within Germany as well as on the European and the global level. Due to its
complexity, it may be excessive to resume points for synergy in one sentence,
anyhow, after screening of diverse written documentation and a series of 11
interviews, the more or less explicit logic of subsidiarity in research collaboration
most often show through, with activities close to industry located at the regional or
national level, and long term, high scale projects ideally placed on the European level.
2
Main points for collaboration, synergy, complementarity
with regard to the NNE RTD ERA
2.1
Necessary conditions for making ERA happen
A basic and most necessary condition for making ERA happen is that the need for
international cooperation in research. Within the domain of NNE-RTD, Germany has
with no doubt a dominant position, due to competencies and industrial involvement,
which can be illustrated notably by the interest expressed by foreign interview
partners in close cooperation with Germany.
54
The competencies for energy research are split in 4 ministries, in charge of research, economic
affairs, the environment and agriculture.
55
See Forschungsverbund Solar (2003), Expunktpapier, p.6.
Germany
184
Our German interview partners often underlined that firstly, researchers are very well
integrated in international networks that work on the (traditional) basis of conferences
and publications as well as cooperations within EU framework programmes, and that
secondly, networking has transaction costs, in monetary terms but also in terms of
opportunity costs, related to time losses for research activities as such. Perfectly
recognising the evidence of the international character of research, they insist on the
fact that local impact (mainly on industrial participation) is very much a matter of
local activity.
According to Dr. Eisenbeiss, coordinator of energy research at the Helmholtz
Association and member of the board of Research Centre Jülich, ERA (or at least the
globalisation of research) already exists because it exists for industry, choosing
research providers all over the world according to expected results, and not according
to the country of origin.
The development of ERA is in this sense accompanied by increased competition and
cooperation. In the field of non-nuclear energy research, where industrial involvement
is recognised as an important element, competition is relevant both on the level of
high excellence requested by internationally active companies, and on the level of
SMEs, with a certain need of protection and geographical closeness in their
cooperative pattern.
Barriers to international cooperation have mainly been identified on the following
levels:
•
Transaction costs: costs for travelling, time for exchanges, increased demand for
networking on several levels (regional, national and international), which leads to
a kind of overkill in coordination activities. Some interview partners generally
doubt about the usefulness of “top-down-coordination” of research.
•
Barriers of language: in big countries like Germany, people (especially in small
research structures or companies) are used to work in German, communication in
a foreign language is still perceived as a barrier. There is some tendency to
introduce English teaching in (technical subjects) in university, which could
perhaps partly provide a solution to this problem.
•
Administrative barriers: administrative obligations in European projects are
perceived as extremely burdensome, considerably reducing incentives to apply for
a European project. According to a researcher in Baden-Würtemberg, a clear
correlation between the administrative weight and the geographical level of
administration (regional – national – European) can be observed, both concerning
application formalities and reporting.
•
Institutional differences between countries: especially for new instruments like
ERA-Net, the different institutional setting of research systems makes it difficult
to integrate in a project all the partners that would be interesting, due to problems
of eligibility. For example, the programme manager in North Rhine-Westphalia
referred to an idea for an ERA-Net launched with a Dutch partner, that should
also integrate French participants. However, the institutional setting in France did
not allow for eligibility for ERA-Net, the project has been abandoned in its initial
version and shall now be pursued as a Coordination action.
Germany
185
•
The way of functioning of European structures in Brussels is difficult to
understand for people who have never been involved in European decision
making, mainly met on the regional level. Moreover, and this has also been
mentioned by national actors (even by the national contact point for EU-projects),
information coming from Brussels is often contradictory from one source to the
other, as well as over time. As an example, the financial guidelines in the
framework of integrated actions has been mentioned, still available only in a draft
version and apparently in contradiction to the possibilities of financial officers of
the projects
56
. The varying size of integrated projects from one call to the other
has also been mentioned as difficult to explain to national actors who firstly are
deterred from application due to the envisaged size and have afterwards to be
informed that in fact, projects may also be submitted with far less partners and a
smaller budget…
•
Intellectual property rights protection is generally perceived as a most evident
barrier to collaboration, but not specific to the development of ERA, as these
problems also emerge on the national level.
•
The idea of opening up national programs to international partners is either not so
new, if the opening results in cooperative projects where each country pays its
participants, or it is politically extremely difficult to defend, if tax-payers money,
directed to national programs and not to European ones, shall benefit participants
from other countries. This observation also holds for regional funding in
Germany. The willingness of national governments to give up national autonomy
will depend on the thematic domain.
2.2
Existing opportunities for ERA
2.2.1
Regional versus national actors in ERA
A question particular to Germany concerns the implications of regions or “Länder” in
the European research area: the biggest of these Länder are bigger than the small
European member states, with more than 8 million inhabitants. Anyhow, it came out
as rather rare and exceptional if a German Land has direct contacts to the national
level of another country. Collaborative and informative contacts are mainly
established with other provinces, as for instance with Austrian regions, even if Austria
as a whole is smaller that the German partner.
In section 3.1.3 it will be discussed that regions are mainly supporting research
activities with an (economic) impact on the region itself. Anyhow, even if they are
interested in participating in European activities, they may have the impression to be
the odd one out, when the size of the projects and the need for well established
relationships discourage newcomers, don’t feeling necessarily as a partner with equal
rights.
2.2.2
Thematic complementarities
According to our interview partner from the German National Contact Point, the
thematic domains treated in Brussels and Germany do not considerably differ, which
56
A financial plan shall be established for the first 18 months and then outlined in milestones,
anyhow, such a plan can not be controlled according to the rules of financial officers, who does
not know which kind of costs are really incurred.
Germany
186
can be explained by the fact that Germany itself has important financial means for
research funding, and is therefore autonomous. As a big country, EU-funding is
perceived as a complement, whereas it can be a substantial input for small countries.
Anyhow, several interview partner mentioned the domain of coal plant technologies
as missing in the EU-programs, as it is considered as one of the most promising
technology for CO
2
reduction under the (given) condition of available energy
resources in Europe today.
Complementarities between the national and the European level are mainly connected
to research either with a need of big equipment (like in the framework of Euratom) or
in a long time horizon, like nuclear fusion.
2.2.3
Trans-border cooperations
Interview partners referred to several trans-border cooperations, notably with other
German speaking countries (Austria and Switzerland), but also around an
environmental and regional objective (i.e. the Alpine region).
•
The German-Austrian-Swiss energy cooperation (DÖSE) has been presented as a
network of persons that know each other since a long time, meeting regularly to
exchange information on research activities. It is now considering the submission
of an ERA-Net project.
•
ARGE Alp, a free association of alpine regions
57
created in 1992, aims to deal
with the joint expectations of its members, within the field of its competencies, in
particular in the cultural, social, economic and ecological fields, thanks to cross-
border cooperation and, with a minimum of institutionalisation, to increase
awareness of the general responsibility towards the natural alpine environment, to
make contact between populations and citizens easier, to strengthen the positions
of the countries, Regions, provinces and cantons and contribute to cooperation in
Europe together with other institutions. According to M. Olk from the Bavarian
Ministry of the Economy, ARGE Alp has tried to establish a common project in
NNE and energy savings, but due to institutional differences this became to
complicated and has been limited to mutual exchange of information.
•
Alpen Adria is a working community created in 1978 with the task of joint
informative expert treatment and co-ordination of issues in the interests of the
members. One of the 15 working areas is generation and transmission of energy,
where there was an attempt launched in the mid 1990s to sign an energy
convention, which finally did not work out as Switzerland would not participate.
2.2.4
Bilateral cooperation
Bilateral cooperation of Germany is content driven and not driven by preferences to
one partner country or an other. Nevertheless, agreements are often historically
determined. M. Eisenbeiss mentions for instance the good relationship of the
Research Centre Jülich with Krakau, providing a specific scholarship to young
researchers.
Bilateral relations exist to the USA, which is perceived as most interesting, other non-
European relations exist with China in the domain of environmental technologies.
57
Ticino, St Gallen, Grisons, Vorarlberg, Tirol, Salzburg, Baden-Württemberg, Bayern, Bolzano
Süd-Tirol, Trento and Lombardie.
Germany
187
Within Europe, bilateral relations are very domain specific, oriented at the excellence
of partner countries.
2.2.5
Other international cooperations
Germany is an active partner in the implementing agreements of the International
Energy Agency (IEA) There exist about 40 agreements, and Germany is partner in
about half of them.
The intensity of collaboration varies a lot between agreements, some are limited to an
information platform with meetings twice a year, others have determined budgets and
commitments.
2.2.6
The use of new cooperative instruments of the European Commission
•
ERA-Net has been mentioned several times as a possible evolution of existing
contacts or collaborations. However, at the same time the perception of ERA-Net
is not very clear, an institutional incompatibilities seem to occur as possible
problems.
•
Networks of excellence are perceived as the right instrument for collaboration
between universities, anyhow, the participation of industrial partners is regularly
brought up. Due to competition between actors in applied research, NoEs don’t
seem a priori the best instrument in domains like material science and energy
research
58
. They are also criticised for the high transaction costs the generate,
without directly financing research.
•
Integrated projects are well known for the high project management intensity, that
can only be assured by very big and competent partners in exactly this domain. It
has been mentioned that existing cooperative links may suffer if one partner is not
allowed to participate in a specific IP. The reorientation of IPs to a more classical
dimension is largely welcomed by most of our interview partners. However, the
existence of very big projects is still welcomed by others, as soon as they are
strong enough to apply for (participation in) several IPs.
A critique concerns the importance of lobbying in the preparation of IPs, as this is
a very complicated process where only those actors that have a permanent
presence in Brussels are finally able to follow.
2.3
Concrete possible policy actions
Interview partners have generally not promoted any concrete policy actions that
should be developed. According to one of them, special attention should be paid to
the risk of east-western brain-drain: by now, European projects do not specially pay
attention on the support and enhancement of research competence in central and
eastern European countries, or in Russia. Scholarships that support both a stay in
Western Europe and the return to the country of origin should be promoted.
58
Interview with M. Neef, Projektträger Jülich.
Germany
188
3
Short background information
3.1
The overall energy situation of Germany
3.1.1
Energy supply and energy production: phasing out nuclear power
59
Energy security is an important issue for Germany as the country has limited
indigenous energy resources. Moreover, the decision to gradually phase out nuclear
power by 2035, covering 30% of electricity generation and 13% of total primary
energy supply in 2001, will increase Germany’s reliance on imports of coal and
natural gas, which represent 27% and 78% of demand for these fuels. Germany will
also continue to depend heavily on imported oil, at about 40% of its total primary
energy supply. To address these energy security issues, Germany is focusing on the
development of domestic fuels and renewables, energy end-use efficiency , and on
good relations with energy exporting countries (IEA 2002, p7).
Germany is the most populated European country, and has the largest European
energy market. In 2000, total primary energy supply (TPES) was 339,6 Mtoe. TPES
has decreased in the last decade due to reduction in energy consumption in the new
Länder, a recent energy forecast
60
predicts a slight growth (3,2%) between 1999 and
2010.
A comparison of Total Primary Energy Supply (Exhibit 3-1) and Energy Production
by Source (Exhibit 3-2) illustrates the important dependency on oil and gas imports.
Exhibit 3-1 Total Primary Energy Supply, 1973 to 2010
*… includes solar, wind, combustible renewables and waste, and ambient heat production.
Source: IEA 2002, Germany country review, based on energy balances of OECD Countries,
IEA/OECD Paris 2001, and country submission.
59
The following paragraphs are mainly based on IEA 2002, Country Report Germany.
60
Energy forecast prepared by PROGNOS/EWI by order of the Federal Ministry of Economic and
Technology, cited after IEA 2002.
Germany
189
Exhibit 3-2 Energy Production by Source, 1973 to 2010
*… includes solar, wind, combustible renewables and waste, and ambient heat production.
Source: IEA 2002, Germany country review, based on energy balances of OECD Countries,
IEA/OECD Paris 2001, and country submission.
Germany also is the largest electricity market in Europe, legally fully opened to
competition since 1998.
3.1.2
Renewable energies
In October 2000, the federal government introduced the
National Climate Protection
Programme
61
, aiming to meet the national CO
2
reduction target, which is tighter than
Germany’s Kyoto target.
In 2000, the share of renewables (including hydro-power) in primary energy supply
was 3,4% and in electricity generation 7,3%. The Renewable Energies Act of April
2000 aims to double the share of renewables in total energy supply by 2010 compared
to 2000 levels. With 9 GW of installed capacity, Germany is world leader in the area
of wind power. Renewables are supported by both direct subsidies and feed-in tariffs,
introduced by the 2000 act.
However, the German government wishes to maintain a significant coal-based
electricity generation capacity to avoid over-dependence on imported energies. The
policy of hard coal, poorly competitive, is related to social, regional and employment
policies, including considerable but declining subsidies.
Germany’s gas market is second largest in Europe, after the United Kingdom, and
fully liberalised, with about 750 companies operating in the German gas sector.
3.1.3
Main actors in energy policy
62
The federal government and Land governments each have their roles in energy policy
formulation and implementation, energy legislation adopted on the federal level is
61
Including eco-tax, promotion of co-generation and renewables, fuel switching, energy efficiency
improvements in buildings, and industrial voluntary agreements
62
Main actors of the NNE-research system are referred to in section 4.2.
Germany
190
implemented on the Länder level, the 16 Länder can also conceive their own
programmes to promote, e.g. renewables and energy conservation.
63
The Federal Ministry of Economics and Labour (BMWA
64
) has the main
responsibility for energy policy, the Federal Ministry of the Environment, Nature
conservation and Nuclear Safety (BMU) is in charge of environmental policies,
including climate change mitigation, as well as the safety of nuclear facilities and the
disposal of radioactive waste.
The German Energy Agency (DENA) was established in 2000 to promote sustainable
energy, mainly through energy efficiency and renewables. The DENA works in close
co-operation with the energy agencies of the Länder or with other local contact points
that are active in energy efficiency.
3.2
The national RTDI system
3.2.1
Research financing and research implementation
Gross domestic expenditure for research and development (GERD) accounted for
€
50,1 billion in 2000, which corresponds to 2,45% of GDP, with a growing tendency
since the mid-1990, mainly due to increases in industrial R&D expenditure. Exhibit
3-3 and Exhibit 3-4 provide an overview of research expenditure according to
financing and implementing sectors in 1999, as well as the evolution of research
expenditures according to financing sectors since 1981.
63
See IEA Country report Germany, 2002.
64
Formally Federal Ministry for Economics and Technology (BMWi)
Germany
191
Exhibit 3-3 Germany’s R&D expenditure according to financing and
implementing sectors, 1999, in billion
€
Financing
Implementation
Source: BMBF, Faktenbericht Forschung 2002
Industry 32,4
Federal
exp: 8,7
Länder:
7,9
Foreign
countries
1,0
Private
non profit
organisations
0,2
Foreign
countries
Industry
Higher Education
Institutions
Non-university
research
organisations
Gross domestic expenditure on
research and development
48,2
Germany
192
Exhibit 3-4 R&D expenditure in Germany, according to financing sectors
65
Source: BMBF, Faktenbericht 2002, based on Stifterverband Wissenschaftsstatistik,
Statistisches Bundesamt
65
Data collected at domestic financing sectors, partly estimated, up to 1990 former federal
republic of Germany, from 1991 onwards Germany.
Data on Länder expenditure : federal institutions (from 1981 onwards and Länder (from
1985 onwards) only with their R&D contributions.
Industry : R&D expenditure financed by industry in the specific sector, and financing
that other sectors have received from the specific sector, as well as industrial R&D
financing to foreign countries.
Länder
Federal government
Total R&D expenditure:
Private non profit institutions:
Relation to Gross National Income
Public, Länder
Public, federal
Industry
Germany
193
3.2.2
Institutional setting
The institutional setting of the German research system is characterised by a
differentiation along three dimensions: the federalist division of competencies
between the federal level and the 16 Länder, the organisational division of policy
development, funding implementation, finally the differentiation of research
organisations according to the degree of application of research and according to
domains.
•
Within the federalist setting of the German research system, funding of R&D is
organised both on the national and the federal level, with (basic) university
funding mainly in the competence of Länder and more applied funding under
shared competence of the federal government and the Länder. The federal
Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF) is in charge of research policy,
domain specific R&D funding is partly dispatched to the technical ministries.
R&D competencies in the 16 Länder are found in Ministries for Culture and
Research, and in Ministries for industrial affairs.
•
Non-institutional funding of scientific research is financed by the independent
German Research Foundation (Deutsche Forschungsgesmeinschaft – DFG),
financed at more or less equal parts by the federal government and the Länder.
•
The implementation of domain specific project funding, organised in research
programmes and funded either by the federal ministries in charge or by the
Länder, is most often delegated to so called “Projektträger”. These programme
managers are selected after open call for tenders for several years, and paid at up
to 5% of the overall programme budget.
•
Research is realised in universities, in non-university research centres and by
industry.
−
Universities are implicated in the entire range of research, from fundamental research to
applied research in collaboration with industry. Actually, there exist 92 universities in Germany
and 253 other higher education institutions.
−
The Max-Planck Society (MPG) with its 80 institutes, research units, laboratories and
working groups promotes extra-university basic research in the domains of biology, medical
research, chemical and physical research and humanist research
−
The Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft is the leading organisation for institutes of applied research in
Europe, undertaking contract research on behalf of industry, the service sector and the
government. Actually, 56 Fraunhofer Institutes exist all over Germany.
−
The Helmholtz Association is a community of 15 scientific-technical and biological-medical
research centres. These centres have been commissioned with pursuing long-term research goals
on behalf of the state and society. Helmholtz centres are financed at 90% by the federal budget
and 10% by the Länder they are situated in.
−
Research institutes of the so called “blue list” are financed at equal parts by the federal
budget and the Länder. Currently, 79 such institutes exist, all with some supra-regional service
mission.
−
Moreover, there exist 50 institutes directly connected to the federal government for specific
research and expertise, 167 research institutions of the Länder and communities, and seven
academies of science.
Germany
194
4
Brief description of NNE RTD organisation
4.1
National funding of non-nuclear energy
4.1.1
National funding programmes
The basic national plan for energy R&D in Germany is set out in the
1996 “Fourth
Programme on Energy Research and Energy Technologies”
, which runs until
2005, and provides up to 50% of additional project costs of R&D projects realised by
industry or research centres and institutes, as well as cooperative projects. The
programme is organised in the following domains:
•
Efficiency increase and secondary energy
•
Rational use of energy and energy saving
•
Energy supply with reduced CO
2
emissions (photovoltaic, wind, biomass,
renewables)
In 2003, the BMWA has launched a parallel programme called
COORETEC
, that
shall provide the basis for the replacement of existing coal-plants from 2010 onwards,
aiming at the reduction of CO
2
emissions and the efficient conversion of energy, and
under recognition of the dependency on fossil fuels.
In the domain of renewable energies, a programme of the Federal Ministry of
Consumer Protection, Food and agriculture (BMVEL) finances research,
development, information diffusion and consulting, as well as public relations under
the heading of
“renewable primary products”
, including their energetic use.
The Ministry for Education and Research (BMBF) has launched a
“Strategy fund
”,in
the late 1990s, initially for financing the restructuring of the Helmholtz Gemeinschaft
and the increasing cooperation between different national research institutions as well
as their enlargement on the international level. Quickly, the networking initiative
went beyond the Helmholtz Gemeinschaft, in 2000 a “fund for networking
(Vernetzungsfonds)”, has been created as a part of the strategy fund, and has received
€
29 million until 2002. A third layer of activity of the Strategy fund is the
enhancement of the economic exploitation of research results.
Initially very broad, the Networking fund has now been limited to projects in the field
of renewable energies, corresponding to the priority that the national government
gives to this domain. In 2003, the budget of this “networking fund for renewable
energy research” will go beyond 10 million Euro.
Financing is provided for:
•
organisation, presentation, reporting, Internet presentation
•
R&D projects
•
System-analytical accompanying research
In the case of ReFuelNet (see below, paragraph 4.2.4), R&D projects receive the
largest part, with about 70-80% of total funding.
4.1.2
Quantitative overview of federal research budgets
Germany
195
Federal spending on energy research decreased by 26% between 1993 and 2002,
mainly due to the decrease in nuclear research, even if non-nuclear research also
decreased by 12% in this period. As Exhibit 4-1and Exhibit 4-2 show, in 2001,
federal spending in non-nuclear energy rose by 34% in one year, profiting from an
extra budget, the “investing in the future” programme, that was financed by the
revenues of the UMTS licences. In total, additional DM 100 million (more than
€
50
million) have been devoted to energy research.
In total, according to data presented in the IEA country report on Germany (2002),
non-nuclear energy research accounts for 55% of federal budget for energy R&D
(Exhibit 4-1); numbers from the Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF,
Faktenbericht Forschung 2002) show an even lower weight of non-nuclear energy
research (Exhibit 4-2), referring generally to higher overall budgets than the IEA.
Exhibit 4-1 Federal Government Energy R&D Budget (million Euros)
1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000
2001e 2002e
Non-nuclear
170
130
105
135
114
122
106
123
165
1
150
1
Nuclear fission
78
66
66
52
37
36
20
23
16
8
Nuclear fusion
118
104
91
99
108
122
126
122
110
112
Total
366
300
262
285
259
280
252
269
292
271
e: estimate
1
: Includes financing from the “Investing in the Future Programme”.
Source: IEA 2002, based on Country submission.
Exhibit 4-2 Federal expenditure on energy research and technology, Million
€
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
1989 1991
1995 1997
1998 1999 2000 2001e 2002e
Nuclear fusion
Removal of nuclear
plants, risk participation
Nuclear energy research
Renewable energies and
rational use of energy
Coal and other fossil
fuels
e:
estimate
Source: BMBF, Faktenbericht Forschung 2002.
Even if an international comparison of data in energy research is very delicate if not
impossible, the IEA database provides internal differentiation according to
technologies in non-nuclear energy research, depicted in Exhibit 4-3 and rendered in
the following table (Exhibit 4-4). The picture clearly shows that
•
Solar energy research diminishes continuously, but still holds the second position,
after having dominated research budgets in the 1990s.
Germany
196
•
Power and storage technologies developed as the new priority under the 2001
peak of public research budgets.
•
Fossil fuels, on the top of national research spending in 1990, quickly declined in
the first half of the last decency, approaching their bottom line with
€
1 million in
1997 and 1998, and benefit from some new interest since then, continuously
growing up to
€
15 million in 2002.
•
Wind energy lost some weight but has relatively stable budgets.
•
Conservation technologies, like power and storage technologies and fossil fuels,
belong to the new priorities of the early years 2000.
Exhibit 4-3 National expenditure on non-nuclear research, 1990 – 2002, IEA
data, Million
€
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
Other techn. / research
Power & storage tech.
Hydro
Geothermal
Biomass
Ocean
Wind
Solar
Fossil fuels
Conservation
Source: IEA R&D database
Exhibit 4-4 National expenditure on non-nuclear research, 1990 – 2002, IEA
data, Million
€
, figures
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002
Conservation
13
13
9
9
10
12
17
11
10
9
7
19
15
Fossile fuels
69
50
37
22
16
11
3
1
1
8
7
14
15
Solar
63
70
69
66
42
39
41
34
41
36
39
33
27
Wind
11
9
12
23
16
16
27
17
16
17
12
14
12
Ocean
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Biomass
1
4
8
9
5
1
2
4
5
1
5
3
3
Geothermal
3
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
2
6
3
Hydro
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Power & storage
tech.
7
5
4
2
2
2
9
16
17
6
17
33
38
Other techn. /
research
2
1
4
14
15
5
9
7
6
5
9
10
10
Source: IEA R&D database
4.2
Main actors (national and regional level)
An overview of main actors in non-nuclear energy research in Germany is provided in
Exhibit 4-5: actors that are globally important in the German research system but
without a particular link to NNE, and actors in energy policy without a focus on RTD
Germany
197
are
not
mentioned, even if they may be involved in NNE-RTD activities at the
margin. Moreover, the list of federal countries (Länder) is not complete but only picks
out the three biggest Länder known for their engagement in energy research.
Exhibit 4-5 Main actors in non-nuclear energy research, Germany
BMWA
BMBF
BMU
BMVEL
Federal administration
Federal countries
Bavaria
North
Rhine
Westphalia
Baden
Würtemberg
Universities,
“Energy-Chairs”
Companies
•
Rational energy
transformation and use,
fossil fuels, plant
technologies
• Research
institutions
•
Renewable
energies
•
Biomass,
Regenerating
raw materials
Programme management agencies
(«
!
Projektträger
!
»)
Energy policy
Energy research
programme design
• Energy research and demonstration
projects
• Provide link between academia and
industry in order to facilitate the
deployment of new technologies
...
DLR
GFZ
FZK
FZJ
HMI
Helmholtz
Association
UMSICHT
IBM
"
P
IWS
Fraunhofer Society
ISE
ZSW
ISET
ISFH
ZAE
DEWi
Regional research centres
Source: Technopolis
4.2.1
Public Funding bodies on the federal level
Germany is well known for its federal policy structure, with research as one of the
domains where both the federal (national) and the regional (Länder) level are
concerned.
On the federal level, during the last 5 years, several redistributions of responsibilities
for research funding in the domain of energy research took place. Until 1998, energy
research and development was under the responsibility of the Federal Ministry of
Education and Research (BMBF). In 1998, most of the responsibility for energy R&D
was transferred to the Federal Ministry of Economics and Technology (BMWi
66
), the
responsibility for R&D in biomass was in within the Federal Ministry of Consumer
Protection, Food and agriculture (BMVEL), whereas the Federal Ministry of the
Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety (BMU) was only in charge of
radiation protection, the BMBF still held the responsibility for nuclear fusion R&D.
In summer 2003, responsibilities moved once more, basically from the BMWA
(former BMWi) to the BMU concerning renewable energy.
66
Now Federal Ministry for Economics and Labour, BMWA
Germany
198
4.2.2
Länder initiatives in non-nuclear energy research
In the framework of the present study, we have visited 3 of the 16 German Länder,
Baden Würtemberg, North Rhine-Westphalia and Bavaria,
representing not only
the most active Länder in NNE-RTD, but more generally the most important ones in
terms of research expenditure. To this list, Lower Saxony could by added, well known
for research in wind-energy.
All interview partners, whether they come from energy (research) departments in
regional governments, from programme managers or from regional research
institutes, underlined that the RDT-policy instruments on the regional level aim at the
very regional level, supporting the creation and enhancement of competencies and,
most importantly, technology transfer from research to industry. The international
orientation is not specially promoted by the Länder we visited. This does of course
not mean that research is not internationally oriented, on the contrary, as it is stressed
by a representative of the Ministry in charge of Research in Baden Würtemberg,
research financing in this Land aims at increasing links between different research
entities (universities, non-university research centres, industry), on a very high level,
and in a way that supports their excellence, allowing them to apply successfully for
other financial means, that may be distributed according to criteria of scientific
excellence. International orientation can therefore be seen as indirect, when it exists.
The thematic orientation is determined either by industry (North Rhine-Westphalia,
with important electricity plants, is known as the “Energy-Land” in Germany, and as
a consequence more interested in plant technologies than others; Baden-Würtemberg,
with its well developed industrial region around Stuttgart has a special focus on fuel
cells…).
Besides classical subsidies for research and transfer projects, an important instrument
of Länder policy is the funding of regional research centres, mostly at a rate of about
20% of overall costs. Following centres can be noted:
•
Zentrum für Sonnenenergie und Wasserstoff Forschung, Baden Würtemberg
(ZSW)
•
Bavarian Centre for applied Energy Research, Bavaria (ZAE)
•
Institut für Solarenergieforschung GmbH, Lower Saxony (ISFH)
•
German Institute for Wind Energy, Lower Saxony (DEWi)
•
Institut für Solare Energieversorgungstechnik, Hessen (ISET)
4.2.3
Main research institutions involved in NNE-RTD
The
Helmholtz Association
is a community of 15 scientific-technical and biological-
medical research centres, commissioned with pursuing long-term research goals on
behalf of the state and society, they perform research in strategic programmes in six
core fields: Energy, Earth and Environment, Health, Key Technologies, Structure of
Matter, Transport and Space. Six of these centres participate in energy research:
•
German Aerospace Center (DLR, Deutsches Zentrum für Luft- und Raumfahrt)
•
Forschungszentrum Karlsruhe (FZK)
•
Forschungszentrum Jülich (FZJ)
•
Geo-Forschungs Zentrum Potsdam (GFZ)
•
Hahn-Meitner Institut (HMI)
Germany
199
•
Max-Plack-Institut für Plasmaphysik (IPP)
67
Mid October 2003, a new orientation for energy research has been announced by the
governing board (Senate) of the Helmholtz Association, designed for the coming 5
years, with a considerable increase of annual budgets (1%). Particular growth (21% in
5 years) is foreseen for the programme renewable energies, where growth will mainly
concentrate on thin film photo-voltaic and concentrated solar systems, and for
efficient energy conversion, where a 15% growth is foreseen within the next 5 years.
Two other programmes concern nuclear fusion and nuclear safety research. For 2004,
financial support of 230 million
€
is projected for energy research.
Helmholtz Centres are financed by the federal government and the Länder at a 90:10
proportion.
Exhibit 4-6 Total costs (basic funding and third party funding), Million
€
2001
2002
2003
Renewable energy
38
40
33
Rational energy conversion
45
55
45
Nuclear fusion
153
163
135
Nuclear safety
44
41
44
Total
280
229
252
Source: Helmholtz Gemeinschaft 2003: Programme – Zahlen – Fakten.
Exhibit 4-7 Costs (basic funding), Million
€
2001
2002
2003
Renewable energy
30
28
23
Rational energy conversion
33
42
35
Nuclear fusion
107
118
105
Nuclear safety
39
35
31
Total
209
223
194
Source: Helmholtz Gemeinschaft 2003: Programme – Zahlen – Fakten
.
The new orientation is based on a radical reorganisation of the governance structure
of the Helmholtz association, based on the programmatic-strategic evaluation of
program proposals prepared jointly by the participating Helmholtz centres in the
different domains by international and national high level experts. The integration of
international experts can be regarded as recognition of the importance of the
international orientation of the centres; the evaluators have been expected to comment
the strategic orientation and scientific quality of the programs and centres, and give
recommendations.
This evaluation is based on the criteria of scientific quality (mainly backward
oriented), strategic significance (forward looking), including cooperation, and the
appropriateness of expenditure.
In order to support the European activities the Helmholtz association has a
representation in Brussels.
67
Only nuclear fusion
Germany
200
The
Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft
68
is the leading organisation for institutes of applied
research in Europe, undertaking contract research on behalf of industry, the service
sector and the government. At present, the organisation maintains 80 research
establishments at 40 locations throughout Germany. A staff of some 13,000, the
majority of whom are qualified scientists and engineers, generate the annual research
volume of more than about one billion Euro. Of this amount, about one billion Euro is
derived from contract research. Research contracts on behalf of industry and publicly
financed research projects generate approximately two thirds of the Fraunhofer-
Gesellschaft's contract revenue. One third is contributed by the Federal and Länder
governments, as a means of enabling the institutes to work on solutions to problems
that are expected to attain economic and social relevance in the next five to ten years.
Several institutes are involved in NNE-RTD, as for instance
•
ISE: Institute for Solar Energy Systems
•
IBP: Building Physics
•
UMSICHT: Environmental, Safety and Energy Technology
•
IWS: Material and Beam Technology
A global overview about NNE-RTD in
universities
could not be found. Several
universities have so called “energy chairs” (Energie-Lehrstuhl); a linkage to non-
university research centres and organisations is often assured through a double
position of professors, both heading these centres and teaching in university.
4.2.4
Forschungsverbände
Several so called “Forschungsverbände” or research-networks aim to coordinate the
activities of non-university research centres in specific fields. Exhibit 4-8 sketches
some of these networks, the best known is probably the
Forschungsverbund
Sonnenenergie
(solar energy network), with eight participating research centres
69
.
Besides agreements on common research activities between the centres, the network
is also oriented towards industry (especially concerning the identification of relevant
research issues), policy makers and the general public.
In the domain of Solar energy research, another consortium exists in Nordhrine
Westfalia (
Arbeitsgemeinschaft Solar
), conceived as a “virtual research institute”
with 40 higher education institutions in Nordhrine Westfalia connected through the
network and three non-university research centres as members, two of them being
national (DLR and FZ-Jülich) and one regional (ISE). The network is financed in the
framework of the “Land-Initiative energies of the future”, it is managed by the
regional programme manager (Projektträger ETN, Energietechnische Nachhaltigkeit)
situated in Jülich.
Finally
, local networks
exist
in fuel cell research
both in North Rhine-Westphalia
and Baden Würtemberg
70
.
68
See http://www.fraunhofer.de/english/company/index.html
69
See Exhibit 4-5 and paragraph 4.2.3 for more details on the participating centres.
70
Fuel Cell Research Alliance Baden-Würtemberg - BZI
Germany
201
Exhibit 4-8 Networks of German non-nuclear energy research, without
universities and industry
Source: Technopolis France, on the basis of a presentation by Dr. Eisenbeiss and Dr;
Meulenberg, FZ Jülich, modifications: Technopolis.
Networks of Competence are promoted by the Ministry of Education and Research,
with financial means provided through the Networking fund (Vernetzungsfonds) on
the one hand, and through a common internet sight (
www.kompetenznetze.de
) on the
other.
In this framework, besides the two regional networks in fuel cells mentioned above,
two further networks in energy technologies exist:
EnergieRegion Nürnberg e.V
. integrates research competence of university
institutes and industrial research as well as a Fraunhofer Institute.
ReFuelNet
has started in 2002 and brings together 4 universities and 8 research
centres from all over Germany, three major industrial partners as network participants
as well as four research alliances
71
. It is conceived as an open network, with “external
partners” participating in particular projects without being members of the core-team.
4.3
Expected future evolution
During the end of the 90s and in the early years 2000, a reorientation of energy policy
and as a consequence of energy research policy has taken place, marked by global
environmental goal (Kyoto) and Germany specific targets, the changing political
orientation of the government and a broad consultation process on the political
(parliamental) and associative level. It resulted in the decision
71
German Hydrogen Association, Forschungsallianz Brennstoffzellen, Forschungsverbund
Sonnenenergie, VES (Verkehrswirtschaftliche Energiestrategie)
Germany
202
•
to phase out nuclear power, with the implication on the limitation of nuclear
research on nuclear fusion and nuclear safety, as well as a diminution of financial
support in these two fields,
•
and to increase non-nuclear energy research. Herein, renewable energies play a
certain role, but due to the phasing out of nuclear power, clean coal plant
technologies and energy savings have especially gained in importance.
A new national energy research programme is expected to be launched in 2004.
Anyhow, as the actual programme, it will mainly give major orientations, and focus
on a selection according to research quality, without budgets defined à priori for
specific research domains, which corresponds to maintaining the bottom-up approach
actually in place.
Another important change in the research landscape of the last years can be seen in
several networking initiatives, many of these networks have been launched after the
turn of the century. These networks often invest in an English presentation of their
activities, allowing for a better visibility in the European Research Area.
Finally, the reorganisation of the Helmholtz Association according to research
programmes is an important turn from basic funding centre by centre to increased
competition between these centres, in parallel to increased cooperation, based on ex-
post and ex-ante evaluation of research programmes. It would not be surprising if this
experience will be extended to institutions outside Helmholtz.
Our interview partner underlined these changes, but did not announce any other major
challenges for reorientation in the coming years.
5
Current NNE RTD priorities relevant for ERA in NNE RTD
NNE-RTD priorities relevant for ERA can be distinguished in institutional and
organisational priorities on the one hand, and thematic priorities on the other.
On the institutional level, the trend for the creation of networks on the national level,
aiming at structuring research and increasing visibility of excellence on the national
but also on the international level have certainly some relevance for the German
integration in ERA.
Inversely, programmes that only finance coordination costs and not research activities
itself are often perceived as costly and not as helpful, as for reasons of reputation, it is
felt like an obligation to participate even if this is very time-consuming.
On the thematic level, interviews mainly converge in the following points:
•
European programs shall invest in big research ambitions and equipment intensive
research like nuclear fusion.
•
Industrial research near to demonstration projects better profits from national and
regional funding mechanisms, due to administrative reasons, language barriers
and transaction costs of international collaborations.
•
On several levels and in different regions, a turn away from photovoltaics has
been mentioned in the interviews.
•
Plant technologies, especially coal plant technologies should be further developed
in Europe.
Germany
203
6
Description of Priority setting process
The actual federal programme for energy research dates back to 1996, the present
government has announced that a new programme shall be launched before the end of
the legislation period, it will probably be discussed in the coming year.
On a global basis, the priority given to NNE research is based on an assessment of
energy research in 1999 by the Wissenschaftsrat
72
. This kind of domain specific
assessment is a unique task, since no other science policy body in Germany carries
out such independent analyses examining the research fields themselves, the strengths
and weaknesses of the relevant work at the scientific establishments, as well as
structural aspects. The recommendations include the increase of national research
funding for energy research by 30% in 3 years from 1997 onwards, and the bundling
of research in universities and non-university research centres. Both of these
recommendations have been considered, even if the threshold of 30% could not be
achieved.
The priority setting process on the federal policy level is somehow marked by rather
frequent mutations of responsibilities in energy research after the creation of a new
government (see paragraph 4.2.1). According to interviews with M. Flath
73
, former
head of the strategy unit in BMWi and Sabine Semke
74
, the transfer of responsibilities
from BMBF to the BMWi was accompanied by a move of parts of BMBF personnel.
The integration of two cultures (with the BMWi oriented towards liberalisation and
bottom up support, whereas BMBF has more of an expert view, defending the
financing of politically defined themes) took about a year, anyhow, in practice, from
the point of view of the agency managing the R&D support programme (Projektträger
Jülich), there was no break but rather continuity in the approach.
According to Knut Kübler, head of the strategic division in energy policy in the
Ministry of Economics, the department heading the preparation of the new energy
research programme expected to be launched in 2004, evaluation is an ongoing
process and an important tool for decision making in this ministry. Anyhow,
evaluations are confidential, no published evaluation reports on energy research are
available. Programme evaluations are most often realised internally, sometimes with
the support of external consultants and experts.
Another approach for information exchange between actors of research and of policy
making is linked to mobility of the programme-management agency’s staff: several
persons of Projektträger Jülich are regularly working within the ministry for some
months, one of them coming from the energy department.
On the regional level, policy setting is more oriented towards industry and applied
research than on the national level. The priority setting process varies from one Land
to the other, anyhow, evaluation procedures are used, as it was for instance the case in
72
An advisory body to the Federal Government and the state (Länder) governments, whos function
is to draw up recommendations on the development of higher education institutions, science and
the research sector as regards content and structure, as well as on the construction of new
universities.
73
In an interview with Technopolis France in September 2001
74
Projektträger Jülich, in an interview with Technopolis France in September 2001
Germany
204
North Rhine-Westphalia, where the photovoltaic programme has been evaluated after
10 years in order to prepare a new orientation, or in Bavaria, that evaluated the
research funding in the domain of hydrogen energy. In Baden Würtemberg, strategic
evaluation or foresight projects have not been referred to in the interviews, priority
setting is partly supported through communication platforms, organised either by the
one hand the research alliances and networks themselves, or by the Ministry, as for
instance in the framework of a conference on the future of energy supply.
Germany
205
7
References
Bayrisches Staatsministerium für Wirtschaft, verkehr und Technologie (2003),
Bayerische Technologiepolitik. München.
Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung, BMBF (2002): Faktenbericht
Forschung 2002
Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung, BMBF (2003): Deutschland-Israel:
Zusammenarbeit in Wissenschaft, technik und Bildung
Bundesministerium für Umwelt, Naturschutz und Reaktorsicherheit (1999),
Erneuerbare Energien und Nachhaltige Entwicklung.
Bundesministerium für Verbraucherschutz, Ernärung und Landwirtschaft (2003),
Nachwachsende Rohstoffe. Prorgramm de BMVEL zur Förderung von
Forschungs-, Entwicklungs- und Demonstrationsvorhaben. Bonn.
Bundesministerium für Wirtschaft und Arbeit, Bundesministerium für Bildung und
Forschung: Zukunft gestalten – Innovationsförderung, Hilfen für Forschung und
Entwicklung. Brochure, 2003.
Bundesministerium für Wirtschaft und Technologie (BMWi) (2001),
Energieforschung, Investition in die Zukunft. Bonn.
COORETEC, CO2-Reduktions-Technologien, Forschungs- und Entwicklungskonzept
für emissionsarme fossil befeuerte Kraftwerke, Kurzfassung, Stand: 30.04.2003.
Federal Ministry of Education and Research, Basic and Structural Data 2001/2002,
Bonn
ForschungsVerbund Sonnenenergie FVS (2003), Eckpunktepapier des
Forschungsverbunds Sonnenerergie für ein neues Energieforschungsprogramm der
Bundesregierung.
Helmholtz Gemeinschaft 2003: Programme – Zahlen – Fakten. Bonn.
IEA (2002), Energy Policies of IEA Countries, Germany 2002 Review
OECD (2001), Steering and funding of research institutions. Country report:
Germany.
VDI Technology Center, Federal Ministry of Education and Research, (2003),
Kompetenznetze.de 2003/2004: Networks of Competence in Germany
Wissenschaftsrat (1999), Stellungnahme zur Energieforchung. Köln.
Greece
207
Country study Greece
Greece
209
Contents:
1
Summary of country study indicating main points for synergy
211
2
Main points for collaboration, synergy, complementarity with regard to the
NNE RTD ERA
211
2.1
Necessary conditions for making ERA happen
211
2.1.1
Optimising European industry participation in European projects
212
2.1.2
Networks, projects, should have a limited number of partners
212
2.1.3
European FPs shall better balance between demonstration projects and mid-
long term RTD
212
2.2
Existing opportunities for ERA
213
2.3
Apart from EU FP
213
2.4
Concrete possible policy actions
213
3
Short background information
214
3.1
The overall energy situation of Greece
214
3.1.1
The Greek energy policy highly relies on European structural funds
214
3.1.2
Distribution of energy sources
214
3.1.3
Imports/exports
215
3.1.4
Market concentration
215
3.2
The national RTDI system
216
3.2.1
Public/private spending on RTD
216
3.2.2
Main public research organisations and their funding institutions
217
4
Brief description of NNE RTD organisation
218
4.1
General Secretariat for Research and Technology
218
4.2
RTD performers
219
5
Current NNE RTD priorities relevant for ERA in NNE RTD
220
6
Description of Priority setting process
221
6.1
The Greek “Priority” setting process
221
6.2
Little support activities
221
Greece
211
1
Summary of country study indicating main points for
synergy
Greek research organisations have been well-embedded in European Framework
Programmes (FP) 4 and 5,and have developed strong non nuclear energy (NNE)
research fields, for example in wind energy research and technical development
(RTD). Public research institutions and universities are willing to collaborate at the
European level as the national funding sources are scarce, either regarding Greek
industry RTD funding or Greek State’s funding :
•
according to IEA, the total amount of government NNE-RTD expenditures was of
7,4M
€
in 2002
75
•
private RTD expenditures correspond only to 25% of total RTD expenditures
76
European priorities have thus a strong influence on the setting of NNE RTD themes
by researchers.
European structural funds for regional development and European Framework
Programmes stand for important RTD funding sources in Greece, and the Greece
State energy RTD budget is essentially used for making national contributions to
projects financed by those EU programmes. Some 57,8% of all energy RTD financing
is national, and 42,2% comes from the EU.
The major objective of Greece RTD policy is the development of industry RTD
through collaboration with public research institutes.
Renewable energy sources, especially wind and biomass, but also energy saving in
transports, building and industry correspond to “national priorities” as a national
programme has recently been launched by the government. Even if the total amount
of this programme is quite limited, of circa 15M
€
(50% from public funding, on
which 75% from European funds), this interest in renewable energy sources might be
explained by the energy policy objective of generating 20,1% of electricity by
renewables in 2020 and by the necessities of local energy production in Greek islands.
2
Main points for collaboration, synergy, complementarity
with regard to the NNE RTD ERA
2.1
Necessary conditions for making ERA happen
Greece was involved in European Framework Programmes 4 and 5 (see the CORDIS
database
77
), but our interviewees encountered difficulties to participate to FP6. The
implication of European industry
and the
size of projects and networks
are the
two main concerns that have been risen.
75
IEA Greece report 2002 (estimate).
76
Regarding RTD as a whole, not only energy RTD
77
http://dbs.cordis.lu/fep/FP4_MS/ms_el_en.html
Greece
212
2.1.1
Optimising European industry participation in European projects
The necessary involvement of European industry in European projects has been
highlighted by the majority of our interview partners, but this participation is
sometime hard to ensure and can also lead to several difficulties. This problem is even
more accurate since Greek industry RTD funding is more than scarce.
The 6
th
European Framework Programme is judged much more difficult to participate
in, especially because “all the money is going to big industry” according to the RTD
Director of CRES.
Our interlocutors have stressed that European industry, with very few exceptions, is
not prepared to collaborate.
3 main problems have been encountered :
•
Intellectual property rights problems, that burdens with debts public/private RTD
collaborations ; this issue is related to frequent overlapping in partners activities,
according to one of our interviewees
•
Industry is very reluctant to share information, one interlocutor assessed
•
By now, the inclusion of industrial partners is most of the time seen as an artefact
in order to get funds from EU, according to Greek researchers
To ease European industry participation, one suggestion has been expressed.
Regarding his long experience in teaching and research in the US, the RTD Director
of a research institute referred to the US policy toward integration of public and
private research in projects. In deed the internal laboratories of the US Department of
Energy have specific solicitations to solve industry problems ; the project is led and
defined by the companies, but to get funded a proposal has to be submitted to DoE.
This interviewee assessed thus that EU should launch specific calls to satisfy industry
needs and demand, even for short term research.
2.1.2
Networks, projects, should have a limited number of partners
In order to make networks more manageable, one interviewee suggested that
multidisciplinary networks could be created at a local/regional level (for example the
south-east of France…), and each geographical network could be connected at a pluri-
regional level.
The RTD Director of CRES assessed that the perfect networking to him consists in 5
successive stages, according to his experience in the Academy of Wind Energy
78
:
•
the gathering of several institutes in order to form a ‘virtual research centre’
•
the exchange of information
•
the exchange of people (including in teaching and training)
•
the building of a common infrastructure
•
finally the sharing of budgets
2.1.3
European FPs shall better balance between demonstration projects and mid-
long term RTD
Our interlocutors have stressed that FP6 focus on demonstration projects, and this
tendency is considered as dangerous, as “it is no more research” according to a
representative of CRES, the Centre for Renewable Energy Sources. According to
78
www.eawe.org
Greece
213
them, mid-long term research resulting from the anticipation of social, economic,
research needs are also a necessity.
2.2
Existing opportunities for ERA
The Greek government considers international co-operation to be an important
component of Greek R&D energy policy. Greece has been participating actively in
EU programmes : THERMIE, ENERGIE, SAVE, ALTENER, JOULE… Indeed a
large part of projects and funding come from EU, if not the majority, for Greek
research organisations (including universities), not only through FPs, but also through
Competitive programmes, i.e. European non-directive funding for regional
development used by the Greek government. It is to be noted moreover that the Greek
State energy RTD budget is essentially used for making national contributions to
projects financed by those EU programmes (see chapter 4.1).
Most of European collaborations seem to occur in Framework Programmes (in
contrary to bilateral or government-driven multilateral co-operations). They are
driven by thematic complementarities needs. For example the National Technical
University of Athens works with Spain, the UK, Italy, France because of the common
interests in energy in islands. On biomass its collaborations are with Austria, Sweden,
Denmark…
Wind is one of the major Greece thematic, and Greek researchers have developed
collaborations with other European countries known to have a high level of
competencies in that field : Denmark, Germany, the Netherlands, the UK. For
example the Academy of Wind Energy is an important project for Greece in the
European framework, self-funded by the different partners (research organisations of
Greece, Germany, Denmark, and the Netherlands) in the FP6 perspective.
Greek researchers and research institutions do not encounter barriers to collaboration ;
however, as their budget is highly relying on European funding, they are at present
quite worried about eventual cuts due to a more difficult accession to FP6 calls. “I
anticipate that in the near future many countries will be driven out European RTD”,
as FP6 seems to evolve to “a club restricted to big partners” the RTD Director of
CRES assessed.
2.3
Apart from EU FP
Outside the European Union, partnerships with Mediterranean countries are favoured
(Israel, Egypt, Tunisia, Cyprus…), because of geographical reasons i.e. common
preoccupations, like energy and water for instance. Some Greek research
organisations are working with Central and Eastern European countries (Poland,
Slovenia, Balkan countries), mainly in the framework of NATO, UN or Science for
Peace programmes, most of the time after a demand of researchers of such countries.
2.4
Concrete possible policy actions
Some suggestions on financing & funding have been made :
•
EU should have more flexible guidelines, according to the characteristics of each
organisation ; for example public research organisations have different overheads
rates, SMEs may not have the same financial capacities to participate in EU
projects than big industry…
•
Seed money should be available for exploratory research
Greece
214
•
Talented young researchers can usually not participate in integrated projects, in
big networks, although most of the time innovation comes from them. Funds shall
be given to these young people starting research, to build a laboratory for
example, in their own countries. For example the US have a “carrier programme”
for good young researchers, in order to make them independent early
From a legal point of view, it has been stressed that the efforts toward a European
patent is a good thing.
Concerning the relations with other energy-related themes, our interviewees assessed
that a closer link with environment should be enforced, especially through the
definition of strong priorities and targets.
3
Short background information
The Greek population numbered 10,6 millions in 2000. The land area of Greece
covers 132 000 km2 ; and Greece is geographically isolated (in 2003) from other EU
countries.
Greece is among the smallest of the economies in the European Union (EU), but has
enjoyed fairly strong growth over the past few years with relatively low inflation. In
2001 and 2002, for instance, Greece's real gross domestic product (GDP) grew by an
estimated 4.1% and 4.0%, respectively.
3.1
The overall energy situation of Greece
3.1.1
The Greek energy policy highly relies on European structural funds
The EU Community Support Framework, which correspond to structural funds for
regional development as an Objective 1 Programme
79
, has provided financial
resources to the Operational Programme for Energy (OPE) and the Operational
Programme for Competitiveness (OPC). These programmes have subsidised a number
of energy-related projects in Greece.
The total budget for the OPE programme was 1,1 billion
€
(1994-2001) ; the EU
contributed 33,8%, the Public Power Corporation (PPC) 39,6%, private sources 21%
and the State 5,6%.
OPC (2000-2006) applies not only to the energy sector but also to a variety of other
economic activities (see chapter 3.2). Four sub-programmes have energy objectives
(increase the use of renewables, etc.). Calls for energy projects proposals were first
launched in 2001: of a total budget of 510M
€
, 170M
€
came from EU Community
Support Framework grants.
3.1.2
Distribution of energy sources
Greece has little national fossil fuel resources, except low-quality lignite. Lignite
accounts for 82%of Greece’s indigenous energy production and 64% of its electricity
supply.
79
http://europa.eu.int/comm/regional_policy/country/prordn/details.cfm?gv_PAY=GR&gv_reg=
ALL&gv_PGM=2000GR161PO016&LAN=5
Greece
215
Oil represents 56,1% of Greece energy (see Exhibit 3-1).
Greece introduced natural gas into its energy mix in 1996. In 2000 natural gas
accounted for 6,1% or primary energy supply, and gas consumption is growing fast.
Exhibit 3-1 Energy share of TPES in 2000
Source : IEA
The 1995 Climate Action Plan established a target for increasing the share of
renewable energy (including large-scale hydro) in primary energy supply to 10% by
2000. The target was not achieved, and the actual renewables share was 5,2% in 2000.
A new indicative target has been set to generate 20,1% of electricity by renewables in
2010.
The geographical situation of Greece, having many isolated islands, is, with the
objective of reducing greenhouse gas, a reason for improving renewables, in a local
energy production perspective.
3.1.3
Imports/exports
Greece depends heavily on imported energy, especially oil, even if its dependence on
oil has decreased since the early 1970’s (77,7% in 1973).
3.1.4
Market concentration
The energy markets in Greece are dominated by highly integrated state-owned
enterprises :
•
although the oil market have been largely liberalised, products may be imported
only by refineries, oil marketing companies and a few large oil users
•
the Greek State owns all lignite deposits, and the Public Power Corporation (PPC)
had exclusive rights to mine lignite until the electricity market was liberalised and
a bidding process was established to lease them ; currently however, there have
not yet been any bidders
•
the natural gas market is dominated by one incumbent supplier, however
following the EU Gas Directive Greece plans to liberalise soon this market
•
approximately 34% of the Greek electricity market was opened to competition in
February 2001. The Greek electricity market remains still one of the most
concentrated in the EU : for instance PPC holds the predominant share of the
transmission system operator
Greece
216
3.2
The national RTDI system
80
The main focus of the Greek national RDT strategy for the coming years are :
•
to increase the share of corporate participation in R&D activities and create
critical mass in the private sector, so that the national R&D system becomes self-
funding
•
and to build a working relationship between research establishments and industry
The 3rd Community Support Framework (CSF), particularly the Operational
Programme "Competitiveness" (OP "COM"), is the main vehicle for promoting the
national R&D strategy over the next six years, as was the case previously with
Operational Programme for Research and Technology I-II (EPET I-II) and STRIDE.
3.2.1
Public/private spending on RTD
Gross Domestic Expenditure on R&D (GERD) has increased most notably in recent
years. The progress achieved in the last ten years is also quite significant, with GERD
rising from 0,38% of GDP in 1989 to 0,68% in 1999. However, this percentage is the
lowest in the European Union where the corresponding EU average is 1,92%. This is
mainly due to the limited contribution of the private sector, compared to the public
sector contribution.
Exhibit 3-2 Total R&D Expenditure by sector of performance (1999)
Sector of performance
%
Government Research Organisations
21,70
Businesses
28,50
Higher Education Institutions
49,50
Private Non Profit Institutions
0,30
Source : GSRT
The imbalance between public RTD expenditure (70% of expenditure on R&D –
national and EU) and private RTD expenditure (25%) explains the central aims of
Greek policy on R&D in the coming five-year period (2001-2006) : adjusting these
ratios and striking an overall balance in the system.
The small contribution made by businesses to the Greek R&D system is even lower in
terms of RTD funding, as seen in the Exhibit 3-3.
80
See
www.cordis.lu/greece/rd.htm
for more information. The following developments have been
extracted from the CORDIS web site.
Greece
217
Exhibit 3-3 Total R&D Expenditure by source of funds (1999)
Source of funds
%
Government
49,94
Industry
24,01
Abroad
25,76
(16,61: CSF/EU)
Other
0,28
Source: GSRT
3.2.2
Main public research organisations and their funding institutions
The majority of government research centres are monitored by the General Secretariat
for Research and Technology of the Ministry of Development, while the rest come
under other ministries. The GSRT supervises 16 research bodies and 15 technological
bodies, including 6 industrial R&D institutions operating as business firms. Other
government R&D bodies are the National Foundation for Agricultural Research
(NAGREF), which comes under the Ministry of Agriculture, the Institute of Geology
and Mineral Exploration (IGME), which comes under the Ministry of Development
and the Research and Technology Centre for National Defence, which comes under
the Ministry of National Defence.
Higher Education Institutions (universities, technological educational institutes and
university research institutes) come under the Ministry of National Education and
Religious Affairs and account for the greater part of research activity, given that most
Greek researchers work within them.
The main entity engaged in drawing up and implementing R&D policies in Greece is
the General Secretariat for Research and Technology (GSRT), which comes under the
Ministry of Development. The GSRT co-ordinates research projects funded by
structural funds from the European Union. As regards developing policies, the GSRT
is backed by the National Council for Research and Technology and other joint
bodies (chambers of commerce, Federation of Greek Industries, etc.).
The Ministry of Development is also responsible for issues relating to industry,
energy, commerce and tourism. In this context, the ministry co-ordinates all research
initiatives and particularly R&D projects funded by the 3rd Community Support
Framework (3rd CSF 2000-2006), and supervises the research centres performing
approximately 20% of the national R&D effort. The principal authority for the entire
3rd CSF negotiation is the Ministry of Economy and Finance.
Other ministries involved in R&D projects are the Ministries of Education,
Agriculture and National Defence. The Ministry of Education and Religious Affairs is
responsible for research organisations in the universities. Moreover, R&D issues in
the agricultural sector and the defence sector are monitored by the Ministry of
Agriculture and the Ministry of National Defence, respectively.
Greece
218
4
Brief description of NNE RTD organisation
4.1
General Secretariat for Research and Technology
GSRT’s major objectives
of energy-related RTD programmes are to encourage
partnerships between research organisations and industry, and to promote innovation
in renewables and energy efficiency. The following areas are emphasised
81
:
•
improvement of the efficiency of the components used in renewable energy
systems and reduction of costs. This includes activities on biomass use,
photovoltaic cell and wind turbine efficiency, reducing the manufacturing costs of
equipment
•
improvement of power quality, optimisation of local load factors, increase of
capacity utilisation, and integration of renewables with the electricity grids
•
development of new technologies and applications for saving energy in buildings,
transports and industry
To implement these policies, financial support is provided mainly by the general state
budget, Competitive Programmes (see chapter 3.1), and EU research programmes.
Some 57,8% of all energy RTD financing is national, and 42,2% comes from the EU.
GSRT’s energy RTD budget is essentially used for making national contributions to
projects financed under the EU programmes, including the Operational Programmes,
and as direct financial support to the centre for Renewable Energy Sources (CRES,
see below) and the Centre for Solid Fuels Technologies and Applications (CSFTA).
GSRT has launched in 2003 a call for proposals
Renewable energy sources and
Energy Saving
82
, in the framework of the Operational Programme on
Competitiveness (RTD actions, Measure 4.5 “Research and Technological
Development Consortia in Sectors of national Priority”).
The total budget is of 16,7M
€
, including 8,8M
€
of public expenditure. This is the
fourth main budget on 8 “Measure 4.5” programmes. Public part of the funding is
composed of the European Regional Development Fund (75%) and of National Funds
(25%).
The objective is to “promote collaboration between research institutes, private bodies,
and the creation of innovative products, processes and services” according to the
GSRT. The recipients are companies in collaborations with research institutions :
universities and research centres. Products or services will contribute to cost-
reduction and improvement of the effectiveness of renewable energy sources,
optimum integration of renewable energy sources in electricity production networks
and the development of new technologies and energy-saving applications for
buildings, industry and transport. The Programme supports industrial research and
initial demonstration (pre-competitive research).
It is pointed out that for each co-financed project, public expenditure will be up to
50% of the total budget. The total budget for each project will range between 1M
€
and 2,5M
€
. The maximum duration for research or demonstration projects is 36
months. By now 15 projects have been funded. Our interlocutor at CRES (Centre for
Renewable Energy Sources) assessed that it is difficult to get into the programme
81
Source : IEA Greece report, 2002.
82
www.gsrt.gr/default.asp?V_ITEM_ID=1287
Greece
219
because of the need of being covered by private companies, given they have little
RTD funding capacities.
Exhibit 4-1 Renewable energy sources and Energy Saving Programme :
thematic areas
Renewable Energy Sources
Energy Saving
Wind
Energy Saving in transport and industry
Energy
Photovoltaic Systems
Active Solar Systems
Biomass
Geothermal energy
Fuel Cells and Hydrogen Technologies
Integration of Renewable Energy
Sources into Energy Systems
Energy Saving in buildings
Source : GSRT
4.2
RTD performers
The main NNE RTD performer is the CRES, the Centre for Renewable Energy
Sources, a research institute supervised by GSRT. Other research institutes and
universities are also involved in NNE RDT.
Centre for Renewable Energy Sources
CRES is both a research centre and an energy centre : its activities includes
dissemination, etc., but also advisory to public authority. One of its role is to create an
energy industry, pushing also industrials to perform research. CRES :
•
is the official Greek government consultant on matters of renewable energy
sources, rational use of energy and energy saving (RES/RUE/ES) in national
policy, strategy and planning
•
carries out applied research and develops innovative technologies which are both
technically/economically viable and environment-friendly
•
organises, supervises and carries out demonstration and pilot projects, to promote
the above technologies
•
implements commercial RES/RUE/ES applications in relevant energy projects of
the private sector, local authorities, professional associations, etc.
•
provides technical services and advice, in the form of specialised know- how and
information, to third parties
•
disseminates technologies in its areas of expertise and provides reliable
information and support to interested organisations and investors
•
organises and/or participates in technical and scientific seminars, educational
programmes, specialised training courses, meetings, etc.
170 people are working in CRES, but only 55 are researchers working on renewables.
Wind is the major RTD activity in CRES, with more than 25 researchers. Then are
coming biomass (10 people), photovoltaic (10 people), small geothermal (2 people :
mid and low temperature, heat pumps).
Greece
220
Until the 5
th
Framework programme, CRES has received funds for its wind energy
RTD ; as it is not a priority anymore in the 6
th
FP, CRES tries to counterbalance its
losses in EU funding by transferring its developed goods and services to the market.
“We are following the market because it is a matter of survival.”
Exhibit 4-2 CRES Renewable energy sources RTD budget for 2000-2003
RTD
M
€
Wind
4,9
Water
0,5
Biomass
1,9
Hydrogen
1,2
Geothermal
0,2
Photovoltaic
1,9
Solar thermal
0,7
Total
11,3
Source : CRES
CRES perform also RTD in energy saving, in the following sectors : industry,
buildings, transportation, new technologies in energy saving and rational use of
energy, environmental impacts of energy investments and energy saving
measurements.
Other research institutes are involved in NNE RDT
, like the Centre for Solid Fuels
Technologies and Applications (CSFTA), the National Centre for Scientific Research
(Demokritos), the Institute for Chemical Processes Engineering (CPERI), the Institute
of Electronic Structure and Lasers (ISEL-FORTH) and the Institute of Chemical
Engineering and High Temperature Chemical Processes (ICE-HT, which operates as
an Independent Academic Institute in close co-operation with the University of
Patras).
Universities
There are mainly 3 universities performing NNE RTD :
•
National Technical University of Athens (NTUA) : several departments are
performing NNE RTD, on clean coal, on renewables (including the Unit for
Renewable Energy Sources RENES
83
, mostly working on wind energy, biomass,
hydro-wave energy, policy issues)
•
University of Tessaloniki
•
University of Patras
5
Current NNE RTD priorities relevant for ERA in NNE RTD
According to the IEA Greece report 2002, on estimated 8,8M
€
of government energy
RTD budget, 7,4M
€
is devoted to NNE RDT. On the 8,8M
€
, 37% of the Greek
State’s energy RTD budget is allocated to power and storage technologies, 31% to
renewables, 9% to energy conservation and 8% to fossil fuels technologies
84
. The IEA
1998 report states that “the pattern of Government spending in energy research and
83
www.ntua.gr/renes/renesengl
84
16% to nuclear technologies.
Greece
221
development is difficult to characterise because it has varied substantially from year
to year, both in categories of research and in total amounts. (…) The large yearly
variations in research funding suggest that research priorities are not clearly
established, and that they are set more by availability of funds than by systematic
planning.”
If this statement seems to be still actual, the launch of the Programme “Renewable
energy sources and energy efficiency” indicates that these themes are the main
concerns of the Greek State in the field of NNE RDT (see chapter 4.1). Nevertheless
this programme is especially devoted to support the development of industry RTD
activities and industry RTD expenditures.
Renewables are mostly wind and biomass energy. The energetic needs of the Greek
islands, and the necessity of local energy production, are one of the reasons for the
development of renewables. Some RTD on hydrogen (in CRES for example) from
renewable energy sources are thus carried out.
Energy saving RTD is focusing on buildings, marginally on industry and barely not
on transports.
6
Description of Priority setting process
6.1
The Greek “Priority” setting process
RTD priority setting is characterised by a high degree of laissez-faire for researchers,
and by an opportunistic behaviour of those researchers concerning funding sources.
•
There is no orientation given by ministries to research institutions and
researchers. RTD subjects are defined in laboratories, not even at the research
organisation level. Our interlocutors in different research organisations even
assessed that the words “national priority” are inappropriate for Greece.
•
Research works are mostly determined by the scarce sources of funds. EU
priorities and national priorities are particularly important because they represent
the huge majority of research funding. The RTD Director of CRES told us that
“when a researcher has an idea, he tries first to know if a budget is available
through call to tenders and then competes for it.” Forecasting activities are only
“to see where the money will be available” according to the same interviewee.
The needs of eventual industrial partners have also an influence on internal
research priorities of research organisations
New orientations in RTD activities (for example the introduction of hydrogen RTD)
usually come from international watch and experience, or from considering existing
Greek RTD / funding capacities (for example when CRES was founded its members
choose to perform wind RTD “by accident” : “this was the only technology that could
be developed in Greece, that we could afford by ourselves.”)
6.2
Little support activities
Evaluation of projects intervenes mainly at their beginning, i.e. for a proposal to be
funded. In universities the autonomy is highly recognised : “we can do what we want”
assessed a university researcher. In CRES the result assessment of a project (products,
publications…) is the only way to evaluate it ex post.
Greece
222
According to IEA, “projects funded under the new Operational Programme for
Competitiveness are subject to more rigorous monitoring, often resulting in new
employment, patents, reports, citations, prototypes etc.” However our interlocutor
managing the programme on Renewable energy sources an energy saving only
assumed that a halfway evaluation will be done.
In research units as well as in the GSRT, foresight exercises or impact assessments,
etc., seem to be barely used.
However a recent initiative has been launched by the Greek government : the Greek
Technology Foresight (TF) Programme. The programme aims at looking into the
future of Greek society by identifying the implications of emerging science and
technology. In particular, TF seeks to investigate how science, research and
technology are expected to contribute in shaping the Greek “knowledge society”. The
time horizons for this investigation are the years 2015 and 2021.
Greece
223
Annexe A
Acronyms
CRES
Renewable Energy Sources
CSFTA
Centre for Solid Fuels Technologies and Applications
CSF
Community Support Framework
ERA
European Research Area
ES
Energy saving
FP
Framework programme
GDP
Gross domestic product
GSRT
General Secretariat for Research and Technology
IEA
International energy agency
IGME
Institute of Geology and Mineral Exploration
ICE-HT
Institute of Chemical Engineering and High Temperature Chemical
Processes
NAGREF
National Foundation for Agricultural Research
NNE
Non nuclear energy
NTUA
National Technical University of Athens
OPC
Operational Programme for Competitiveness
OPE
Operational Programme for Energy
PPC
Public Power Corporation
RENES
Unit for Renewable Energy Sources
RES
Renewable energy sources
RUE
Rational use of energy
RTD
Research and technical development
Annexe B
Bibliography
IEA Greece report 2002
IEA Greece report 1998
Hungary
225
Country study Hungary
Hungary
227
Contents:
1
Summary of country study indicating main points for synergy
229
2
Main points for collaboration, synergy, complementarity with regard to the
NNE RTD ERA
230
2.1
The institutional and sectoral participation in ERA
230
2.2
Different forms of international cooperation
230
2.3
Thematic priorities for Hungary and Hungarian international cooperation
231
2.4
Strengths and weaknesses of Hungary in ERA and of ERA for Hungary
231
3
Short background information
232
3.1
The overall energy situation of Hungary
232
3.2
The national RTDI system
236
4
Brief description of NNE RTD organisation
238
4.1
Main actors (national and regional level)
238
4.2
Energy related R&D funding
239
4.3
Participation in European programmes
239
5
Current NNE RTD priorities relevant for ERA in NNE RTD
239
6
Description of Priority setting process
241
7
Documentation
242
Hungary
229
1
Summary of country study indicating main points for
synergy
The Republic of Hungary is located in Central Eastern Europe, and makes part of the
countries accessing the EU in May 2004. It has a population of about 10,2 million, out
of which 1,9 million live in the capital Budapest.
Almost all of Hungary’s primary energy supply (TPES) is derived from fossil fuels,
mainly gas (40%), coal an oil (16% and 28% respectively, in 2000). Nuclear energy
accounts for about 15%, renewables have only a marginal role in energy production.
In comparison to other accession countries, the energy system in Hungary is marked
by its high degree of privatisation (nearly 100%), the working of a regulator, and its
situation as a net importer of energy, that raises the issue of security of supply.
85
The research system has also undergone major changes, leading to an increased role
of universities and a diminishing (but still important) role of the National Academy of
Sciences. With a ratio of DERD/GDP
86
of less then 1%, research expenditures are
very low in Hungary, and mostly (and increasingly) oriented towards applied
research.
Public funding for energy research is mainly administered by the Ministry of
Education, in yearly programmes that are based on the orientations of the national
energy policy and on European priorities, in order to promote participation in the
framework programmes.
European research collaboration of Hungarian partners primarily passes through the
participation in framework programmes and concerns mostly universities and the
Academy of Science. The low industrial integration in the European Research Area,
besides internationalisation through privatisation and foreign direct investment, is
perceived as a weakness, especially concerning SMEs, who miss both capacity,
experience and consultancy structures.
National priorities in NNE-RTD cover European priorities in so far as they are
oriented along national energy policy objectives, that are themselves bound to the
results of the EU-accession negotiations, obliging Hungary to increase renewables
and green electricity. However, interview partners stress the lack of a clear energy
research strategy.
85
In contrast to that, the Czech Republic as an other example, has not privatised the entire
electricity sector, it has only recently installed a regulator, and has secured its energy supply
trough the installation of a new nuclear plant.
86
Domestic enxpenditure on research and development / gross domestic product.
Hungary
230
2
Main points for collaboration, synergy, complementarity
with regard to the NNE RTD ERA
87
2.1
The institutional and sectoral participation in ERA
The settings of both the public research system and the energy industry system led to
different ways of international integration of research in the two domains:
•
Hungarian universities have good connections with universities abroad, mainly in
Europe. They can participate in European high level research.
•
According to our interview partner, “All energy companies are privatised from
big western companies: they don’t have any problems doing their research
activities, as their research activity is anyhow in their home country.” At least, it
seems that research results in industry are rather attributed to headquarters (i.e. in
terms of patenting and publication), even if Hungarian teams participate
(substantially) in the development. As a result, the international integration of
research activities is somehow already in place in this sector, due to the
Hungarian privatisation policy.
•
The situation is different with regard to SMEs who neither have the capacity nor
sufficient experience in European cooperation. The tendering process of the
framework programmes is too complicated for them, which is even more a
problem as a well developed consultancy system for SMEs is missing in Hungary.
The chambers have information, but they cannot provide direct support in the
project preparation, as it is offered for instance in Austria by BIT
88
.
2.2
Different forms of international cooperation
International cooperation in NNE-RTD mainly passes through the European
Framework Programs. Bilateral cooperation rather concerns investment than research,
as for instance the improvement of old heating systems, with the Netherlands.
In principle, collaborations (may) exist with all countries, traditionally, German
partners are most important.
According to our interview partners, there is no research cooperation with Visegrad
countries, but there exit special energy efficiency projects in this area.
Beyond research and development projects with European funding, an other
programme has been mentioned in the field of geo-thermal heating systems: This is a
domain, where Hungary shows relative strengths, as it has the biggest geo-thermal
heated greenhouse system. In early 2003, the World Bank started an initiative,
financed by the Central and European Geothermal fund, allowing to decrease the risk
of innovative investment projects in this domain. During 6 months, a feasibility study
is financed, in case of a positive result, the beneficiary is obliged to do the investment.
87
Chapter two is entirely based on the interviews with M. Meszaros from the Ministry of
Education and M. Poos from the Ministry of Industry, held in November 2003. It has therefor to
be interpreted as appreciation of main points of synergy, and not so much as robust results of
profound research in the field.
88
BIT - the Bureau for International Research and Technology Cooperation - is the Austrian centre
offering services to participants in European and international programmes, actions and
initiatives for cooperation in research, technological development and demonstration (RTD).
Hungary
231
In the field of low temperature geothermal energy, collaborations also exist with
Iceland.
2.3
Thematic priorities for Hungary and Hungarian international
cooperation
The development of bio-fuels and green electricity is an official objective of the
Hungarian State, negotiated with the European Union in the framework of the
accession process. Green electricity should increase by 8 times from 0,5% today to
3,6% in 2010, taking into account the expected rise in consumption.
In the domain of bio-fuels, biomass and wind energy are on the top of Hungarian
technologies, followed by waste incineration and (to a limited extent) geothermal
energy, mainly low temperature. Concerning hydropower, the geographical situation
in Hungary is particularly difficult, as it is a very flat country, so the Danube can not
really be used for energy generation.
The domain of wind energy is all hold by private investment; the Ministry is not
always informed. According to our interview partner, municipalities and
environmental authorities participate in the support of wind energy.
Special needs for research, also in international collaboration, concern the closer
linkage between energy and transport related questions, as transport is the fastest
growing energy consumption sector, and there is no solution to this problem yet
available .
Generally, any research aiming to close the technology gap related to the climate
change challenge is needed, from production up to consumption, and always with an
integrated view.
Moreover, questions of security of energy supply, including energy efficiency and
renewables, are of primary importance for Hungary.
2.4
Strengths and weaknesses of Hungary in ERA and of ERA for
Hungary
Hungarian success rates in the European Framework Programs is relatively satisfying,
but participation is limited in two ways: firstly, it mainly concerns universities and
institutes from the Academy of Science, and very rarely industrial partners, as they
are either hold by foreign companies or too small to participate. Secondly, the actual
size of the projects makes it very difficult for Hungarian partners to take the role of a
project leader, as the lead came out to be very intensive in project-management where
Hungarians lack experience. This led to a considerable fall in the number of
Hungarian leaders from the second call of FP6 onwards.
The difficulty of finding other potential participants in European projects than
university institutes also concerns communities, that could participate in the
“Concerto” initiative: For the second call, only due to personal connections of M.
Meszaros, in charge of information diffusion about the Community programs, a city
could by found that had experience in energy research, in energy efficiency as part of
a regional policy, and that has the capacity needed for a European project.
Hungary
232
On the question of possible improvements, our Hungarian interlocutors rather reacted
with self-criticism: The major difficulty of Hungarian energy research and, as a
consequence, its integration in the European Research Area, stem from the missing
strategy on the national level: No white paper on energy research policy exists,
providing a framework of the promotion of Hungarian research and actors.
Moreover, an improvement of educational programmes and of the regional
institutional basis in Hungary are asked for. All that is partly in the responsibility of
the national, partly of the regional level, but not of the European level.
3
Short background information
3.1
The overall energy situation of Hungary
Though energy supply in Hungary is fairly diversified, almost all of Hungary’s TPES
is derived from fossil fuels (Exhibit 3-1)
89
; In 2000, coal and oil represent large but
gradually decreasing shares, equivalent to 16% and 28% respectively. Gas confirms
its leading role with almost 40% of TPES in 2000. Nuclear remains important,
accounting for 15% of the energy supply in 2000 and maintaining a large role in
electricity supply. Combustible renewables and wastes (1,5% in 2000 against 1,2% in
1990) and hydro (stable at 0,1%) are negligible. Since 1990, almost all primary
energies have decreased, the main change being a fall in coal use by more than 4%
between 1990 and 2000.
Exhibit 3-1 Total Primary Energy Supply, 1973 to 2020
Source: IEA: Energy Policies of IEA Countries -- Hungary (2003) -- 2003 Review. Based on:
Energy Balances of OECD Countries, IEA/OECD Paris, 2002; and country submission.
89
See IEA (2003), p. 22.
Hungary
233
Hungary is a small producer of oil and net dry gas. In 2000, Hungary imported
16 Mtoe, out of which 5,8 Mtoe was crude oil, 7,3 Mtoe was natural gas and 1,2 Mtoe
was coal. During this period, Hungary exported a total of 2,4 Mtoe energy, of which
1,7 Mtoe of petroleum products and 0,5 Mtoe of electricity. Hungary’s external
energy dependency grew from 47% in 1994 to 56% in 2000
90
Exhibit 3-2 Energy Production by Source, 1997 - 2030
* includes geothermal, solar, wind, combustible renewables and wastes.
Source: IEA: Energy Policies of IEA Countries -- Hungary (2003) -- 2003 Review. Based on:
Energy Balances of OECD Countries, IEA/OECD Paris, 2001, and country submission.
90
Imports minus experots divided by TPES, see IEA (2003) p. 22.
Hungary
234
Exhibit 3-3 Electricity Generation by Source, 1973 to 2010
* includes solar, wind, combustible renewables and waste, and electricity from heat pumps.
Source: IEA: Energy Policies of IEA Countries -- Hungary (2003) -- 2003 Review. Based on:
Energy Balances of OECD Countries, IEA/OECD Paris, 2001, and country submission.
The energy intensity of the Hungarian economy improved between 1990 and 2000,
from the tenth highest in OECD countries (lower than North America), at 0,27 toe per
unit of GDP (in US$ 1995 PPP), to the thirteenth highest, at 0,22 toe per unit of GDP,
roughly equivalent to the IEA average (
Exhibit 3-4
)
91
91
see IEA (2003), p. 22.
Hungary
235
Exhibit 3-4 Energy Intensity in Hungary and in Other Selected IEA Countries,
1973 to 2010, (toe per thousand US$ at 1995 prices and purchasing power
parities)
Source: IEA: Energy Policies of IEA Countries -- Hungary (2003) -- 2003 Review. Based on:
Energy Balances of OECD Countries, IEA/OECD Paris, 2002; National Accounts of OECD
Countries, OECD Paris, 2002; and country submissions.
Hungarian energy policy aims to maintain a balance between security of supply, cost-
effective delivery of energy to the economy, energy efficiency and the environment
92
.
The Hungarian energy sector is still in transition and is expanding its energy markets
with the perspective of becoming an EU member State. Hungary has been a front
runner in the future expansion of the EU, it has complied with the
acquis
communautaire
including the section on energy.
The 2001 Electricity Acts brings the Hungarian electricity market into accordance
with EU directives in terms of third party access to the electricity grid and removal of
subsidies, and defines a market structure that includes electriciy generation
companies, electricity distributors, power traders, and an electricity grid operator.
Since January 1, 2003, the 200 largest industrial users, constituting about 35% of total
consumption, are allowed to choose their electricity suppliers. Third party access to
the grid has begun, and independent power suppliers are now allowed to “wheel”
power through the grid. The transitional public utility market will still have an official
price for electricity, with the Hungarian national electricity company, MVM
93
, as the
wholesaler; this will cover the 65% of the market not affected by the first stage of
market liberalisation, and will gradually diminish as the competitive market expands;
The public utility market should entirely disappear no later than 2010
94
.
92
See the IEA country report.
93
Magyar Müvek Részvénytarsasag, Hungarian Electricity Companies Ltd. MVM’s generation is
organised into eight different generating companies.
94
See
Fossil Energy International : An Energy Overvie w of the Republic of
Hungary.
http://www.fe.doe.gov/international/hungover.html
Hungary
236
3.2
The national RTDI system
Like other countries in transition, Hungary has seen its national effort in R&D
drastically reduced during the 1990s: the relation DERD/GDP passed from 1,09% in
1991 to 0;75% in 1996 and started to recover than slightly, to 0,94% in 2001.
The national RTDI system has undergone profound changes since the transition to
democracy in 1989, and even since the turn of the century, the institutional setting is
moving.
Since January 2000, the direction for R&D (OM KFHA) of the Ministry of Education
(OM) is in charge of the coordination of science, technology and innovation policy
(STI), of piloting national R&D programmes and of promoting international scientific
collaborations
95
. In 2001, the implementation of research programmes has been
attributed to the newly created direction of resources in the same ministry.
The programmes are either financed by
•
the National fund for technological development (KMUFA), covering about 20
million Euros in 2002, oriented toward technological innovation, the development
of R&D infrastructure, distribution of research results and their economic
application. It finances notably experimental projects in generic technologies like
biotechnology, environmental technologies and information- and
telecommunication technologies.
96
•
or belong to the national R&D programmes (NKFP) covering about forty million
Euros in 2002
97
. They have been launched in 2001, funds are attributed after
public calls for tender. They shall support big research activities, innovation and
development initiatives, interdisciplinary collaborations and cross fertilisation
between fundamental and applied research.
Some “technical” ministries also finance applied research in their domain (for
instance the ministry for agriculture, rural development, environment and water
management).
A third public fund is the National fund for scientific research (OTKA), launched in
1986, which is an independent source of financing since 1991, mostly for basic
research and work of young researchers. 50% of its funding goes to universities, 30%
to public research centres, the remaining 20% are used for different scientific
initiatives.
95
This description is taken from a report of OST, based on an investigation in March 2003.
However, our interview partners announced in November 2003 that the coordination tasks shall
be attributed to an agency external to the ministry in 2004.
96
See OST, after Ministry of education.
97
See OST 2003.
Hungary
237
Exhibit 3-5 Volume of the three major Hungarian R&D programmes,
allocated resources
Source: OECD 2003
The transformation of the system has changed relative weights in the sector
distribution of actors in R&D: the
national academy of science
has been reduced,
even if it still holds an important position, and sees its funds increasing again since
1996. Its research institutes have been reorganised, in 2002, 38 institutes existed
within the Academy of Science.
In parallel,
universities
, which are the only institutions that can deliver doctoral
degrees, have increased their importance, not only in terms of number of students but
also in terms of research personnel (see Exhibit 3-6).
Exhibit 3-6 R&D staff number by sector (FTE)
Source: OECD 2003
As Exhibit 3-7 shows
98
, government and business are the main performers and
funders of research; In 1999 higher education played a less important role than the
other sectors. As it has been said above, that has changed since. Between 1996 and
1999 funding, both from government and business, has increased, but increases were
higher with regard to government funding; This trend continues. During the same
period funding from abroad has increased by roughly 40%, due to funding from the
EU Framework Programme and multinational companies. The latter also relates to the
fact that business support for higher education has increased by a factor of 2,5.
98
See OECD 2003 for the following paragraphe.
Hungary
238
Industrial financing of research
lies far below the European average: In 2000,
companies in the EU finance 65,5% of DERD in average, which corresponds to
1,26% of GDP, whereas respective numbers in Hungary are 37,8% and 0,3
99
.
Exhibit 3-7 Structure of the R&D system: Funding and Performance (in
millions 1995 US$)
Source: OECD 2003
During the last decency, new types of research organisations have emerged in
Hungary, notably cooperative research centres (CRC), the Bay Zoltan foundation, and
the community centres of excellence.
4
Brief description of NNE RTD organisation
4.1
Main actors (national and regional level)
There is no single institution co-ordinating energy R&D efforts in Hungary.
According to our interview partner, the biggest part of funding in NNE goes to the
following universities:
•
Technical University of Budapest
•
University Scendisdvan, active in agricultural activities, biomass, and renewables
•
Debrecen University active in renewables
•
Djös Uniersity.
99
See OST 2003.
Hungary
239
•
The Hungarian Energy Centre is an implementing agency of the Ministry of
Industry. It is not involved in research. It is organised in two main parts: the
energy efficiency program directorate (including European programmes) and the
Energy information directorate, preparing all energy statistics (instead of the
Hungarian Statistical Office).
4.2
Energy related R&D funding
Public funding for energy related R&D is very limited in Hungary, which is partly
related to the very low R&D activity of industry in this sector.
Exhibit 4-1 Funded energy related R&D projects in National Programmes
Funded energy related R&D projects
million HUF
National R&D Programmes (NKFP), 2001
1 296
National R&D Programmes (NKFP), 2002
120
national technology Development Fund (KMFA)
197
Source: Meszaros, Presentation, 2002.
4.3
Participation in European programmes
Hungary is fully associated to the European Framework programmes. The financial
and institutional framework of Hungarian participation has been clearly established.
Since 1999, the Hungarian contribution to FP5 has continuously increased. Hungary
has had a 30% “success rate” in the FP5, “Thematic Programme 4: Energy,
Environment and sustainable Development – Part B. Energy” (113 submitted projects
with Hungarian applicants for 35 projects funded with 45 Hungarian participants)
100
.
5
Current NNE RTD priorities relevant for ERA in NNE RTD
Hungary has integrated energy efficiency in the medium-term economic development
plan (Szechenyi plan, 1999) with a significant effort to allocate resources for an
integrated organisation (Energy Centre Hungary) and sectoral programmes, notably to
retrofit housing.
101
The National R&D Programmes established in the frame of the Szechenyi Plan with
through the Government Resolution 1073/2000 foresee call for proposals in the
following domains (energy related subjects are put forward as separated bullet
points):
102
•
Improving the quality of life
•
Information and communication technologies
•
Environmental and material science
−
utilisation of new energy sources
−
energy-saving and energy efficient technologies
•
Research on agribusiness and biotechnology
•
Research on the national heritage and contemporary social challenges.
100
See IEA 2003, p. 138.
101
IEA: Energy, Efficiency in Economies in Transition (EITs): A Policy Priority. Sept. 2003.
102
The follwing paragraphes are based on the presentation of M. Meszaros at the IEA in 2003.
Hungary
240
Typical projects in the field of energy are integrated technology systems for RES
utilisation, the financing of an innovation centre for photovoltaic technology, or
surveying of solar and wind energy potential.
The National Technology Development Fund
103
also covers some energy related
subjects in its call for proposals in 2002:
•
Applied research
−
improving product quality (EE and ENV aspects)
•
Biotechnology
•
Information Technologies and applications
•
Environmental research activities
−
combustion equipment with low emission
−
equipment using RES
•
Human resources for research and innovation.
Six other areas do not cover energy at all, the last to programme lines concern
“Joining the Eu R&D FP” and “Participation in the R&D thematic networks of the
EU”.
Altogether, according to M. Meszaros, energy only covers a very small part of the
total research budget.
The only statistical basis concerning the thematic differentiation in non-nuclear
energy research in Hungary that we have at our disposal is drawn from the IEA
research database, and depicted in Exhibit 4-3. Data exist for the years 1995, 1998
(showing very little NNE RTD expenditure), 2001 and 2002. The figure shows that in
these two recent years, biomass is dominating NNE-RTD in Hungary, followed by
solar energy and fossil fuels. Wind only emerges in 2002.
103
Government Decree 98/1996
Hungary
241
Exhibit 5-1 National expenditure on non-nuclear research, 1995 – 2002, IEA
data, Million
€
0,0
0,5
1,0
1,5
2,0
2,5
1995
1998
2001
2002
Other Tech./research
Power and storage
tech.
Geothermal
Biomass
Wind
Solar
Fossil fuels
Conservation
Source: IEA R&D database
6
Description of Priority setting process
The Hungarian Ministry of Education is in charge of the coordination of public
research programmes, including energy research. The role of the energy department is
•
the preparation of the concept of the programme
•
its implementation
•
information dissemination about the programme
•
and information dissemination about energy related issues in FP6 of the European
Union.
Even if a programme for non-nuclear energy is globally defined, there are no
predefined budgets for different sectors, and the only selection criterion is the quality
of the project, not its thematic orientation. Therefore, the sectoral distribution differs a
lot from one year to the other. `
According to our interview partner from the Ministry of Education, the main
weakness is the missing general research strategy. The Ministry’s stuff is very limited
for strategy building: “We can prepare good programmes, but they are not always
harmonised with each office”. Within the broad national foresight exercise launched
in 1997 energy related issues are covered in the chapter on the environment.
According to our interview partner, the study is very theoretic and doesn’t provide an
orientation “what we shall do tomorrow”, even if some emerging technologies are
mentioned.
In the field of energy research, and once the overall R&D budget is defined, the
Energy unit of the Ministry of Education first prepares a concept and discusses it with
different actors individually, namely with representatives from the ministry of the
economy (in charge of energy policy) and the ministry of the environment. Formally,
all ministries are officially asked. The preparation of a programme takes about 2
months.
Hungary
242
Priorities for the research programs come from the energy policy, and from the
objectives concerning the EU integration process, and concern
104
•
the increase of renewables
•
the improvement of energy efficiency on the side of the end-user
•
the improvement of the emission balance.
The orientations of FP6 are taken into consideration, as the ministry wishes to
encourage participation.
After publication of the research programmes, the incoming applications are
evaluated by independent experts and then ranked, first within each domain. A higher
committee discusses the overall ranking and prepares the final selection, the State
Secretary decides for funding.
Once the projects have been funded, the programs undergo some internal ex-post
evaluation, but no overall evaluation report exists. The internal evaluation is based on
a project report prepared by the project leader.
About twice a year “information days” are organised by the Ministry where the
project leaders are invited to present their project and results.
Due to limited State support, basic research is very limited, most funds go o applied
research and demonstration.
A final remark on the priority setting process in Hungary concerns an observation that
is not scientifically robust, but has been confirmed both by the way (potential)
interview partners referred to each other
105
and by the interviewees themselves: In
parallel to a formal exchange of information, the persons involved in energy research
policy do know each other rather well, not only because the number of persons
concerned is relatively limited, but also because these persons partly have passed
former parts of their career in another institution, where present representatives from
different institutions or ministries may have formally been colleagues sharing the
same office… This leads to a network with a good information flow between the
energy agency and the different ministries involved.
7
Documentation
Bergasse, Emmanuel (2003): What energy policy for South East Europe? Public
Servic Review, European Union, Bruxelles/Luxembourg, Spring 2003.
Fossil Energy International : An Energy Overview of the Republic of Hungary.
http://www.fe.doe.gov/international/hungover.html
Havas Attila, (2000) : Foresight in Reshaping the National Innovation System –
Preliminary lessons of TEP, the Hungarian Technology Foresight Programme.
Background Papers “Awareness of and deepened knowledge of foresight issues
and results”, Editor: S.Ertel, IPTS, Sevilla, April 2000.
104
Interview with M. Meszaros, November 2003.
105
The attempt to meet different persons, one from the ministry of agriculture, and another one
from the Ministry of Education, all resulted in the same recommendation to contact M.
Meszaros, who perfectly represents the consensus between them all.
Hungary
243
http://jrc.es/projects/enlargement/FN/ThematicNetworkMeetings/Nicosia-00-
03/Positionpapers/…
International Energy Agency (2003): Energy Policies of IEA Countries, Hungary
2003 Review. Paris.
Mesaros, Geza (2002) : Energy Technology an Research – Presentation for the IEA In
Depth Review 2002, R&D Division of the Ministry of Education, Department for
Advanced Technologies.
OECD (2003): Steering and funding of research institutions – Country report:
Hungary. Paris, 2003.
OECD (2000): Regulatory reform in Hungary, regulatory reform in the electricity
sector, Paris.
Schoen, Antoine (2003): Les Systèmes Nationaux de Recherche et d’Innovation du
Monde et leurs Relatios avec la France: La Hongrie. Anlayse réalisée par l’OST en
collaboration avec le MJENR et le MAE. Dossier réalisé par Antoine Schoen,
Paris 2003.
Iceland
245
Country study Iceland
Iceland
247
Contents:
1
Summary of country study indicating main points for synergy
249
2
Main points for collaboration, synergy, complementarity with regard to the
NNE RTD ERA
249
2.1
Necessary conditions for making ERA happen
249
2.2
Existing opportunities for ERA
250
2.2.1
European collaborations
250
2.2.2
Extra-European collaborations
251
2.3
Concrete possible policy actions
251
2.3.1
Legal implications & suggestions
251
2.3.2
Relations with other energy-related themes
251
3
Short background information
251
3.1
The overall energy situation of Iceland
251
3.1.1
Distribution of energy sources
251
3.1.2
Market concentration
253
3.1.3
Energy policy
254
3.2
The national RTDI system
254
3.2.1
Public/private spending on RTD
254
3.2.2
New Icelandic RTDI system
255
3.2.3
RTD institutions
257
4
Brief description of NNE RTD organisation
258
4.1
Recent changes in Icelandic NNE RTD organisation
258
4.1.1
Restructuring of Orkustofnun, the National Energy Authority
258
4.2
Main actors
259
4.2.1
NNE RTD funding
259
4.2.2
Public research organisations
259
4.2.3
Companies
260
5
Current NNE RTD priorities relevant for ERA in NNE RTD
261
6
Description of Priority setting process
262
Iceland
249
1
Summary of country study indicating main points for
synergy
Iceland, an EU associate country, has the third highest rate of R&D expenditure in
Europe : more than 3% of GDP. Energy RTD represents 2% of total Icelandic RTD
expenditures, both public and private, i.e. 5,3 M
€
in 2001. The country is only
performing non-nuclear energy research and technical development (NNE RTD). This
RTD is driven by two main considerations :
•
the use and development of domestic energy sources
•
the reduction of the share of fossil fuels in energy consumption
This has led to performing RTD on geothermal and hydrothermal energy, as applied
research mainly, and to the growing interest for hydrogen research, especially for
transports (the fishing fleet in the first CO
2
producer in Iceland).
As a consequence, Icelandic European co-operation are mainly devoted to these
themes. However, within EU framework Programmes (FP), if Iceland’s collaborations
on hydrogen are developing, problems occur regarding geothermal and hydropower
RTD, as these specific needs and preoccupations are far to be common to all
European countries.
Recent organisational changes, both in the science, technology and innovation system
and in the NNE RTD system, have led to a greater competitive environment for
research funding, and to the designation of a energy RTD funding agency, the
National Energy Authority. Consequently, it seems that priority setting process
definition is currently ongoing.
2
Main points for collaboration, synergy, complementarity
with regard to the NNE RTD ERA
2.1
Necessary conditions for making ERA happen
NNE RTD in Iceland is strongly oriented towards national energy resources,
geothermal energy and hydropower, and as a consequence Icelandic RTD
international co-operations are determined by this specific national framework (see
chapter 2.2). These Iceland characteristics represents a problem for European
collaboration, as only a few European countries have shared potential and interests in
geothermal energy and hydropower. According to our Icelandic interview partners,
the main necessary condition for making ERA happen would be the support of
specific needs of each country, an emphasis on specific solutions. “The main obstacle
for development in geothermal is non technical : it is political”, as some countries (the
United Kingdom, Sweden, which have no geothermal resources) strongly opposed a
European support to geothermal energy. Our interviewees count on the entrance of
Central and Eastern European Countries, among which some have a special interest
on geothermal and hydropower, to counter-balance European opponents.
As well, two instruments are mentioned by our interview partners to solve this
problem :
Iceland
250
•
ERA-NET. However, our interlocutor in Rannís, the Icelandic Centre for R&D,
assessed that obstacles for the building of ERA are mainly located in Iceland,
since the ministries are not aware of what ERA or ERA-NET mean
•
networking : the constitution of a network of those who are involved in
geothermal RTD in Europe
Some other various suggestions have been expressed by our Icelandic interlocutors in
order to improve the building of an ERA in NNE, that are not tightly linked to the
Iceland specific situation.
•
ERA should more focus on long term research, as for short term and applied
research (for example in geothermal) it is more easy to be funded by other
entities, like companies etc. Long term research should be a preoccupation of the
European union as it is a way of ensuring benefits for the future. This long term
research can involve companies, in a close co-operation with public research
institutions.
•
One interview partner took example on the US Department of Energy to suggest a
closer co-operation between DG Tren and DG Research, i.e. a strong common
research policy and energy policy, ensuring a more optimal RTD funding. He
suggested the creation of a single entity in charge of policy making. FPs would be
organised in that framework.
•
Mobility would be very valuable, i.e. performing research in another country,
even for a few months. The European Commission could support this mobility
through funding the difference in the cost of living, one interviewee suggested.
This measure would add to existing means of developing individual contacts
(colloquies…) that are seen as a necessity for making ERA happen.
•
Applying procedures to FPs should be simplified.
2.2
Existing opportunities for ERA
2.2.1
European collaborations
Iceland collaborates mostly in geothermal RTD, with countries having potential and
needs in this field. Among this type of countries, Iceland is mostly collaborating with
European partners, especially from Central and Eastern Europe Countries : Poland,
Slovakia, Hungary, Romania. This co-operation consists mainly of applied research,
know-how providing and advises services. However Iceland faces there competition
with bigger countries, like France for example.
France, Germany, Turkey, Greece, Portugal, having geothermal activity, are also
partners for Icelandic RTD organisations on applied research.
Iceland is also part of the Nordic Energy Research organisation, and has in
consequence taken part in some energy RTD programmes with Nordic countries in
that framework.
Iceland has been participating in European Framework Programmes since 1994. But
as geothermal has been more or less “expelled” from the 5
th
and 6
th
Framework
Programmes, according to ÍSOR Director, the Icelandic involvement in EU projects
has decreased. Moreover, Iceland does not participate in the Soultz project on hot dry
rock technology between France, Germany and Switzerland, as the programme was
already initiated when Iceland entered FPs.
Iceland
251
However, in the 5
th
and especially 6
th
FPs, Iceland has been involved in hydrogen
RTD, through many companies, universities and public research organisations
(IceTech, for example). The creation of NewEnergy, a limited liability company
devoted to hydrogen RTD, takes place in the European project on hydrogen. The
collaboration on hydrogen is strong with Germany and is currently developing with
Norway.
2.2.2
Extra-European collaborations
As previously, Iceland partners are countries with potential and interests in
geothermal : African countries (Kenya, Burundi, Ethiopia…), Russia, Georgia, some
Asian countries (China, Japan, Indonesia…) and Latin America countries (El
Salvador, Nicaragua…).
Iceland has also some collaborations with the United States (Department of Energy),
and with the World Bank and the UN (the Geothermal Training Programme, for
developing countries students, managed by the National Energy Authority and with
the majority of teaching and training being ensured by ÍSOR, a research organisation).
2.3
Concrete possible policy actions
2.3.1
Legal implications & suggestions
In Iceland, the utilisation of geothermal energy in housing has been facilitated by a
law, encouraging all the houses to be equipped for geothermal heating. One of our
interviewees suggested therefore that the European Commission could do that sort of
incentive, in order to replace fossil fuels by environment-friendly energies.
2.3.2
Relations with other energy-related themes
Energy RTD in Iceland is strongly linked to environmental concerns ; this is indeed
one of the main reason for the development of geothermal energy in housing, and
hydrogen in transports for example.
3
Short background information
Iceland is Europe's westernmost country and is an EU associate country. Its land area
is 100 250 sq km and the country is sparsely populated, with 280 798 inhabitants in
2003.
Iceland Gross Domestic Product was estimated 6,5 billion
€
in 2002. The economy
depends heavily on the fishing industry, which provides 70% of export earnings and
employs 12% of the work force. The two other Icelandic natural resources are
abundant hydrothermal and geothermal power.
3.1
The overall energy situation of Iceland
3.1.1
Distribution of energy sources
Geothermal energy and hydropower are the main energy sources in Iceland,
representing more than 70% of TPES (see Exhibit 3-1).
Iceland
252
Exhibit 3-1 Energy share in total primary energy supply, 2000
Source : IEA
The share of oil (nearly 25% in 2000) has strongly decreased in the past decades, as it
can be seen in Exhibit 3-2 : following the oil crisis of 1973-1974, efforts were made
to use domestic sources of energy to replace oil, particularly for space heating.
Exhibit 3-2 Evolution of primary energy consumption, 1940-2000
Source : Ministry of Industry
Iceland has an abundant energy potential in the form of geothermal energy and
hydropower. Energy consumption per capita in Iceland is the second highest in the
world. About 85% of all housing in the country is heated with geothermal energy, the
remainder being heated with electricity. Most of the country's electricity (93%) is
generated using hydropower, the remainder being based on geothermal power. Only
10-15% of the technically feasible hydropower has been harnessed, and only a
fraction of the geothermal potential available for electricity production.
•
Hydro Power
– Natural conditions in Iceland favour the harnessing of
hydropower for the generation of electricity. The hydropower potential is
theoretically estimated at about 64 TWh per year, of which 40 – 45 TWh per year
may be technically and economically feasible. After taking into account
Iceland
253
environmental aspects the potential will probably be 25 -30 TWh per year. So far
only 6,5 TWh per year have been harnessed.
•
Geothermal Resources
– An estimate has been made for the geothermal
resources. The geothermal resource is not strictly renewable in the same sense as
the hydro resource. An assessment of the total potential for electricity production
from the high-temperature geothermal fields in the country gives a value of about
1500 TWh or 15 TWh per year over a 100 year period. The electricity production
capacity from geothermal fields is now only 1.3 TWh per year.
This energy mix ensure a low level in greenhouse gas emissions. As the Minister of
Industry and Commerce assessed in 2000
106
:
“Emissions of greenhouse gases in Iceland differ from other OECD countries.
Firstly, due to the large share of renewable energy resources and secondly due to the
large share of emissions from the fishing fleet and transportation. (…) In 1990, the
base year of the Kyoto protocol, Iceland’s greenhouse gas emissions were some 40%
lower than they would have been had our Government failed to act as it did during
the oil crisis. (…) Almost 100 per cent of the electricity production, and over 95 per
cent of the stationary energy use is supplied by renewable sources. On the other
hand, Iceland has already reduced its greenhouse gas emissions almost as far as
possible given the current state of technology. Bear in mind that the fishing industry
accounts for almost 50% per cent of the national income. The potential for reducing
emissions from this sector and transportation sector for the commitment period 2008
– 2012 is very limited.”
3.1.2
Market concentration
The Icelandic government has been engaged since a decade in a general privatisation
programme, having effects on the energy market. The major sector (with
telecommunications) still subject to government ownership is electricity. In 2003
Iceland has adopted a new law about deregulation of electricity market, according to
EU directives.
An OECD report
107
assesses :
“Currently, the predominantly state-owned National Power Company (NPC)
dominates generation, and distribution is performed by a number of local-
government-controlled utilities. This structure does not distinguish between natural
monopoly areas (such as transmission and system operation) and competitive
elements (such as generation and distribution). Reform is also needed to comply with
EU directives under the European Economic Area agreement. Proposals before
Parliament would separate the natural monopoly and competitive areas and
eventually privatise government-owned enterprises. However, some aspects could be
improved.
The inter-regional distortion resulting from the uniform tariff schedule (as
distribution is less expensive in Reykjavik, for instance) should be removed to
encourage efficient use. Moreover, the government guarantees NPC’s debt, and its
tax-exempt status further distorts the playing field relative to potential competing
energy suppliers. Removal of these measures would make the social returns to
power-generation projects more transparent and also provide a clearer market basis
for the development of energy-intensive industries.”
106
“Iceland’s Renewable Power Sources”, Address delivered by The Minister of Industry and
Commerce at "Hyforum 2000" in München, Germany, September 12, 2000.
107
OECD, Economic Survey of Iceland, 2003, assessment and recommendations, April 2003.
Iceland
254
3.1.3
Energy policy
108
In early 2001 The Ministry of Industry and Commerce made public its overall policy
objectives and corresponding measures for the coming four years. The 3
rd
objective of
4 was “Increasing the use of domestic energy sources”.
“Iceland possesses extensive sources of renewable energy that have been exploited
only to a limited degree. However, they are more intensively utilised here than
anywhere else in the world. Approximately 2/3 of primary power use in the country
comes from renewable resources, and their share of electric power production is
99%.
The production and export of aluminium, along with other energy-intensive industry,
are actually exports of renewable Icelandic energy. Economic growth in recent years
can be attributed largely to foreign investment in renewable energy sources, and
experience has shown that industry based on these resources can play a role in
halting migration from rural areas.
The Minister of Industry and Commerce considers it essential to increase the
utilisation of domestic renewable energy resources in order to encourage
diversification in industry, create a basis for foreign investment, increase the number
of well-paid jobs, and support business and population development in rural areas.
There must be competition in the production and sale of electricity. At the same time,
there must be continuing research and development on new sources of energy/means
of transmitting energy, to replace dependence on fossil fuels. Environmental
concerns must also be taken into account in exploiting domestic energy sources, and
there must be attempts to reconcile interests in utilising and conserving natural
resources.”
Among the means
109
of achieving these aims (increasing use of domestic sources of
energy and promoting competition in the energy sector) the Minister of Industry and
Commerce has defined that
•
“
energy will be utilised as close as possible to its point of origin” (i.e.
decentralisation of energy production)
•
a plan for a comprehensive utilisation of hydropower and geothermal power will
be concluded
•
the energy sector legislation will be reviewed (in accordance with the European
Directive) ; “
there will be emphasis on encouraging competition in the production
and sale of electric power as well as greater efficiency and security of energy
supplies”
The Ministry puts also emphasis on research and development and announces the
restructuring of the National Energy Authority (see chapter 4).
3.2
The national RTDI system
3.2.1
Public/private spending on RTD
R&D expenditure in Iceland in 2001 was about 250M
€
, amounting to about 3,06% of
GDP, the third highest rate in Europe.
Commercial companies spend about 150M
€
annually on R&D. This constitutes about
60% of Iceland’s total expenditure on R&D (GERD). Around 46% of the total
expenditure on R&D was financed by commercial companies. 34% was from public
institutions and around 18% from abroad.
108
Source : Ministry of Industry, Ministry of Finance, in OECD : STI Outlook 2002 – Country
response to policy questionnaire – Iceland.
109
See the OECD document for the complete list.
Iceland
255
Exhibit 3-3 Total R&D expenditure by funding body and conducting
organisation, 2001, in thousand
€
Business
enterprise
Private non
profit
Public
institutions
Higher
education
TOTAL
Funding body
Business
enterprise
109 824
73,1
161
2,8
2 559
5
5 237
10,9
117 782
46,2
Private non
profit
294
0,2
2 784
48,3
560
1,1
403
0,8
4 042
1,6
Public
institutions
2 089
1,4
2 266
39,3
43 633
85,2
38 764
80,9
86 754
34
Abroad
38 019
25,3
557
9,7
4 484
8,8
3 536
7,4
46 598
18,3
TOTAL
Conducting
org.
150 228
100
5 769
100
51 238
100
47 942
100
255 178
100
%
58,9
2,3
20,1
18,8
100
Source : Rannís
Exhibit 3-4 R&D expenditures (in 1999 year prices, Icelandic crowns) and
share of GDP, 1971-2001
Source : Rannís
3.2.2
New Icelandic RTDI system
A new RTDI organisation has been set up in 2003. Three new Acts laid the
groundwork for a new organisational structure for science and technology policy in
Iceland :
•
Law on the Science and Technology Policy Council - under the Office of the
Prime Minister
•
Law on Public Support to Scientific Research - under the Ministry of Education,
Science and Culture
•
Law on Public Support to Technology Development and Innovation in the
Economy - under the Ministry of Industry and Commerce
The main features of the new laws are as follows (see Exhibit 3-5).
Iceland
256
Exhibit 3-5 New structure of STI policy in Iceland
Parliament
Government
Science and Technology Policy Council
(Four ministers and 14 members from ministries,
research community and industry - PM Chair)
Ministry of Education,
Science and Culture
Ministry of Industry
and Commerce
Science Board
Technology Board
The Icelandic Center for R&D
RANNIS
Research Fund
Fund for Equipment
Fund for Research Training
and Graduate Education
Technological
Development Fund
Source : Rannís
A new
Science and Technology Policy Council
headed by the Prime Minister has
been established to replace the Icelandic Research Council. The Council provides
permanent seats for three other ministers, the Minister of Education and Science, the
Minister of Industry and Commerce and the Minister of Finance. Fourteen other
members are appointed to the Council through nominations from higher education
institutions (four members), labour market organisations (two representing employers
and two representing employees) and other resort ministries (six members).
The mission of the STPC is to strengthen scientific research, scientific training and
technology development in the country in support of Icelandic cultural development
and increased economic competitiveness. The SPTC shall issue tri-annual guidelines
(declarations) for public policies on science and technology. The policy declarations
shall be prepared by the Science Board and the Technology Board respectively.
The Law on Support to Scientific Research establishes the Research Fund
through fusion of the previous Science Fund and the Technology fund of the Icelandic
Research Council. The Research Fund is governed by a board, whose chairman is also
the chairman of the Science Board. Linked to the same board is also the Instrument
Fund financed by 20% annual levies on the University Lottery net income.
Similarly
the Law on the Support to Technology Development and Innovation
establishes a new Technology Development Fund
which is governed be a board
chaired by the Chairman of the Technology Board. So far there is no decision on the
size of this new fund. Thus the link between policy and implementation through
funding is achieved. This law also provides for the establishment of an Innovation
Center, which is to be linked to IceTechh.
The chief responsibility for assistance in preparing policy oriented papers is to be
provided by the Ministry of Education and the Ministry of Industry for the two
respective boards. Overall co-ordination is provided by a secretary to the Science and
Iceland
257
Technology Policy Council to be placed within the Ministry of Education and
Science.
The administrative services to the operational level of the whole structure is provided
by the
Icelandic Centre for Research – Rannís
which is the secretariat of the
previous Icelandic Research Council. Its mission is to give administrative and
operational support to the boards and funding bodies, to manage the international
connections, monitor the effects and impacts of policies and to provide intelligence
and informed advice to the STPC and its boards and sub-committees. Thus Rannís
will administer all the Funding bodies set up by the new legislation including the
Research Fund The Technology Development fund, the Instrument Fund and
Graduate Training Fund and other funding bodies for science that the government
may want to assign to it. It will maintain the National Contact Point Co-ordination
and support network to the EU Framework program, the Nordic NOS - organisations
and other international bodies in science and technology. Thus Rannís will function as
the operational arm of the new council structure.
Rannís operates on an annual budget of about 1,5M
€
, of which about half comes from
the direct budget and the rest from services fees and contracts. The grants funds
operated by Rannís have the following annual budgets :
•
Research fund : 4,63 M
€
•
Instrument fund : 1 M
€
•
Technology Development fund : to be decided (the first call will intervene in
February 2004)
•
Graduate Education Fund : 0,45M
€
•
Information Technology and Environmental Research Programme : 1M
€
3.2.3
RTD institutions
The following figure (Exhibit 3-6) shows the complete organisation of scientific and
technological research in Iceland.
Iceland
258
Exhibit 3-6 Overall organisation of scientific research in Iceland
Non-Profit Organisations
•
The Molecular and Cell Biology Research
•
Laboratories of the Icelandic Cancer Society
•
The Icelandic Cancer Society
•
The Clinic of the Icelandic Heart Association
•!
Iceland GeoSurvey (ISOR)
PARLIAMENT (ALTHING)
Ministry of
Environment
Ministry of
Industry &
Commerce
Ministry of
Agriculture
Ministry of
Fisheries
Ministry of
Finance
Ministry of
Health
Ministry of
Education,
Science &
Culture
RANNIS
Research Fund
Technologi -
cal Institute
ICE-TEC
Building
Research
Institute -
IBRI
National
Energy
Authority
The
Icelandic
Museum of
Natural
History
Myvatn Res .
Station
Nature
Conserv .
Agency
Nat. Land
Survey of
Icel .
Meteorolo -
gical Office
Agricultural
Research
Institute
Forest
Laboratory
Directorate
of
Freshwater
Fisheries
Agricultural
College
Hvanneyri
Marine
Research
Institute
Icelandic
Fisheries
Laboratories
UNIVERSITY OF
ICELAND
Faculties
Institutes & labs
The
National
Museum of
Iceland
The Nordic
Volcanolo -
gical
Institute
UNIVERSITY
OF
AKUREYRI
Other Government Institutions
•
Environmental and Food Agency of Iceland
•
The Administration of Occupational Safety and
Health
Direct Responsibility
Flow of funds
Technology Development Fund
Source : Rannís and Technopolis
4
Brief description of NNE RTD organisation
4.1
Recent changes in Icelandic NNE RTD organisation
4.1.1
Restructuring of Orkustofnun, the National Energy Authority
Until April 2003, Orkustofnun had 2 main purposes :
•
report for parliament for energy policy, build energy statistics etc.
•
carry out most of RTD necessary for exploiting Icelandic energy resources
But in accordance with the European Union’s directive, the Icelandic parliament
adapted in 2003 laws on the deregulation of the electricity market in Iceland. The
supervision of the deregulated market was transferred to Orkustofnun, as well as
increasing role in administrative and regulatory work regarding management of non-
biological natural resources.
These new functions were incompatible with the activity of selling research to
companies. This led to split Orkustofnun into 2 units, and to separate the RTD part to
form a new institution, ÍSOR (see chapter 4.2.2)
110
. Orkustofnun remained an RTD
110
This evolution had been anticipated and the research part of Orkustofnun was already
functioning as an independent entity.
Iceland
259
funding institution, redistributing the Ministry of Industry funds for energy RTD
through RTD contracts with public or private RTD organisations.
Another reason for that restructuring is that the Ministry of Industry has been
criticised for funding only one energy RTD organisation, Orkustofnun ; this
restructuring means then a greater competition for RTD funding.
The new structure of Orkustofnun is the following :
•
the energy division is responsible for all of the permissions, energy statistics,
industry supervision etc.
•
the resource division has the responsibility of elaborating strategic plans for the
government concerning the support of energy projects and research projects. This
division is performing socio-economic, environmental research, geological
measurements etc. in order to evaluate potentials for geothermal or hydropower
RTD ; then Orkustofnun is contracting the technical part of RTD to companies or
research institutes.
To conclude,
the role of the National Energy Authority as an advisory and public
administrative body has been strengthened.
4.2
Main actors
4.2.1
NNE RTD funding
Rannís
through the
Research Fund
is funding a few projects on rational use of
energy.
The
Ministry of Industry
allocates funding on energy research through
Orkustofnun
but allocates also an ad hoc support for hydrogen. The definition of
Orkustofnun
’s role as a funding agency is currently in process (see chapter 6).
4.2.2
Public research organisations
ÍSOR, Iceland GeoSurvey
111
, is a service and research institute providing specialist
services to the Icelandic power industry, the Icelandic government and foreign
companies, in particular in the field of geothermal sciences and utilisation. It was
established on the 1
st
of July 2003, taking over all responsibilities of the former
GeoScience Division of Orkustofnun.
ÍSOR is a 100% self-financed, non-profit governmental institution which operates on
the free market like a private company. It gets no direct funding from the government
but operates on project and contract basis. The annual turnover is close to 4,5 M
€
.
The ÍSOR staff comprises about 50 people.
ÍSOR provides a wide variety of energy research, exploration and development
services on contract in Iceland and abroad. The main services provided are listed in
Exhibit 4-1.
111
www.isor.is
Iceland
260
Exhibit 4-1 Services provided by ÍSOR
Services
Geothermal
and
hydropower
resources
Exploration and research on geothermal resources
Consulting services related to exploration, earth sciences, drilling and production
Services related to geothermal system management, operation and exploitation
Geothermal system modelling
Technical and economic feasibility studies related to utilisation options
Supervision and training of geothermal scientists
Geodetic surveying
Geological mapping
Exploration and evaluation of groundwater resources
Environment
Environmental impact assessment of energy development and chemical pollution
Geological and chemical investigations
Basic data collection and appraisal of undeveloped energy resources
Monitoring of environmental impact of energy production
Other
research
Marine geosciences including oil and gas prospecting
Processing and interpretation of seismic surveys
Freshwater studies
Geotechnical studies for tunnels and constructions
The
Icelandic Building Research Institute
112
, an independent institution responsible
to the Ministry of Industry, performed some RTD related to energy savings, in its
Building technology research. According to its web site, IBRI’s annual turnover is
approximately 3 millions ECU. IBRI is financed over the State budget (approximately
30%) and its own income from e.g. material testing, contract research and cofinancing
of research projects, etc.
IceTech
113
, within its department Materials and Environmental Technology, has
begun to perform RTD on hydrogen, especially through two projects on hydrogen for
city transport systems and on hydrogen storage. The aim is “to replace the use of
fossil fuel in Iceland with domestic renewable energy sources”.
University of Iceland, Reykjavik University and University of Akureyi
are
performing some basic energy research, on earthquakes or on local energy stakes for
example, and are more and more funded through RTD contracts with companies.
4.2.3
Companies
Three companies are the main private actors in energy RTD :
•
the National Power Company, Landsvirkjun
114
•
the Reykjavik Energy Company
115
, operating a geothermal district-heating
system, an electricity distribution network and a water distribution system
•
Hitaveita Sudurnesja
116
, owned by the State and some municipalities and districts
112
www.rabygg.is/r/main/engsummary.asp
113
www.iti.is
114
www.lv.is
115
www.or.is
116
www.hs.is
Iceland
261
5
Current NNE RTD priorities relevant for ERA in NNE RTD
According to Rannís, Icelandic energy RTD expenditures amounted 5,273 M
€
(454
millions crowns) in 2001. This represents both private and public expenditures.
It has not been possible to gather data on the share of public and private expenditures
in NNE RTD as well as an evolution of that shares. However it seems that public
expenditures as decreasing (scientists interviewed have stressed that their amount was
moreover already low), whereas private funding is now supporting basic university
research.
Exhibit 5-1 Public and private Energy RTD expenditure, 2001
Thousand
€
%
Hydropower
3 395
64
Geothermal power
1 784
34
Other energy sources
92
2
Total
5 273
100
Source : RANNIS
Geothermal energy and hydropower RTD are the main NNE RTD performed in
Iceland. This is mostly an applied research, in the fields of production and
distribution.
They also all stress that hydrogen research is becoming more and more important in
Iceland – even if this RTD is on a small scale compared to geothermal for example.
Hydrogen is moreover seen by the Ministry of Industry as a way to fulfil the objective
of phasing out the use of fossil fuels in Iceland (cf. chapter 3.1.1 especially). In
December the government decided to define a policy line in hydrogen RTD (securing
energy for transportation in the next years, etc?).
Iceland, within European projects, is seen as a testing platform, especially because of
city sizes and social acceptance. Emphasis is put on transports (urban transports and
fishing fleet), but some research is also done on hydrogen storage.
All our interviewees have given the example of the creation of the Icelandic New
Energy company to stress the growing importance of hydrogen RTD in Iceland (see
Exhibit 5-2).
Exhibit 5-2 Icelandic New Energy
117
Icelandic New Energy is a limited liability company. Its mission is to “investigate the
potential for eventually replacing the use of fossil fuels in Iceland with hydrogen and create
the world’s first hydrogen economy” according to the web site. The company is held among
others by Shell, Daimler-Chrysler, Mercedes-Benz, University of Iceland and IceTech.
Icelandic New Energy is run as a platform for demonstration and research concerning
hydrogen as a fuel.
Finally, it seems that a new emphasis is put on bioenergy for transports (methane,
biogas…) by Orkustofnun, the National Energy Authority.
117
www.newenergy.is
Iceland
262
6
Description of Priority setting process
Due to the reorganisation of the NNE RTD system in Iceland, i.e. the redefinition of
the role of Orkustofnun, the National Energy Authority, priority setting processes in
Iceland are yet not completely clear
118
. Some characteristics can however be stressed :
•
RTD activities are strongly linked to Icelandic energy resources (geothermal
energy and hydropower), and to the energy policy objective of reducing the share
of fossil fuels in the energetic mix (hydrogen and biogas use in energy-consuming
industries and transport)
•
Orkustofnun bases its RTD funding policy on model studies on energy use (for
example energy use in industry) and on society studies (social acceptance and
social demand). Economical and environmental impacts of NNE RTD are taken
into account : NNE RTD is for example considered in the perspective of
economical growth and employment.
•
Orkustofnun policy line will be drawn in a periodic strategic 5-year plan,
commented and approved by the Ministry of Industry, and built after the hearing
of all energy and energy RTD players. The Director of Orkustofnun assesses that
this process will be more and more formalised ; he stresses indeed that as Iceland
is a small country, decisions until now were often taken through an informal
process.
•
RTD units in universities or research centres are free to define their research
topics. They can apply to the Research Fund (and soon to the Technological
Development Fund) where their project is scientifically evaluated by an
Evaluation Board, established for each yearly call
118
The writing of a first Orkustofnun 5-year-plan is ongoing.
Iceland
263
Annexe A
Acronyms
ERA
European Research Area
FP
Framework programme
GDP
Gross domestic product
IceTech
Icelandic Technical Institute
ÍSOR
Iceland GeoSurvey
NNE
Non nuclear energy
Rannís
Icelandic Centre for Research and Development
RTD
Research and technical development
STI
Science, Technology and Innovation
TPES
Total primary energy supply
Annexe B
Bibliography
•
OECD, European Trend Chart on Innovation, Country Report Iceland, Covering
period: September 2002 – August 2003, European Commission.
•
OECD, Economic Survey of Iceland, 2003, assessment and recommendations,
April 2003.
•
OECD, STI Outlook 2002 – Country response to policy questionnaire – Iceland.
•
“Iceland’s Renewable Power Sources”, Address delivered by The Minister of
Industry and Commerce at "Hyforum 2000" in München, Germany, September
12, 2000.
•
Ministry of Industry and Commerce, Energy in Iceland (http://brunnur.stjr.is).
Iceland
264
Ireland
265
Country study Ireland
Ireland
267
Contents:
1
Main points for collaboration, synergy, complementarity with regard to the
NNE RTD ERA
269
1.1
Conditions to be created in order to make ERA happen (at MS level, expectations
from other countries; expectations from EC)
269
1.1.1
Identification of good, existing, practice leading to special motivation for
collaboration in an ERA-type manner
269
1.1.2
Barriers for collaboration
269
1.2
Potential for ERA
270
1.2.1
Thematic complementarities/synergies
270
1.2.2
Institutional complementarities/synergies
271
1.2.3
Type of research (long/short term; public/private; research/innovation)
271
1.2.4
Opportunities for international collaboration, and whether they would be
situated on cross-border, other bilateral, multilateral European, Framework
programme, or extra-European (US, Japan…) level. Cite motivations
(geographical proximity / thematic proximity / existing networks…)
272
1.3
Concrete possible policy actions that can be derived from the previous items
(observed or suggested, to be developed in the following paragraphs)
273
1.3.1
Financial & funding implications & suggestions
273
1.3.2
Legal implications & suggestions (e.g. relating to status of national RTOs)
273
1.3.3
Relations with other energy-related themes (transport, environment…)
274
2
Overall energy situation of country
274
2.1
Ireland’s Energy Portfolio
274
2.2
Fuel imports
275
2.3
Future Prospects
275
3
National RTDI system
275
3.1
Spending on RTD
275
3.2
Research performed in Higher Education
276
3.3
Main public research (weight of university research, public RTOs)
277
3.4
Funding institutions
278
3.4.1
Higher Education Authority (HEA)
278
3.4.2
Enterprise Ireland (EI)
279
3.4.3
Research Councils
279
4
Brief description of NNE RTD organisation
280
5
Main actors
281
5.1
Sustainable Energy Ireland (SEI)
281
5.1.1
SEI - function and responsibilities
281
5.1.2
R&D at SEI
282
5.1.3
Other activity at SEI
283
5.1.4
FP6 at SEI
283
5.2
Department of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources (DCMNR)
283
5.2.1
Alternative Energy Requirement (AER) programme
283
5.2.2
Future of AER programme
285
5.3
Marine Institute (MI)
285
Ireland
268
5.3.1
FP involvement at MI
285
5.3.2
FP6 at MI
285
5.3.3
Other activity
285
6
Current NNE RTD priorities relevant for ERA in NNE RTD
286
6.1.1
Energy Technology Foresight Panel 1998
286
6.2
Sustainable Energy Green Paper
287
6.2.1
National Climate Change Strategy 2000
288
6.2.2
The Sustainable Energy Act 2002
288
6.3
Other activities which have informed priorities
288
6.3.1
Public Consultation on Wind Energy
288
6.3.2
SEI Strategy Groups
288
Ireland
269
1
Main points for collaboration, synergy, complementarity
with regard to the NNE RTD ERA
1.1
Conditions to be created in order to make ERA happen
1.1.1
Identification of good, existing, practice leading to special motivation for
collaboration in an ERA-type manner
There is evidence that Irish researchers are already well connected in the two energy
fields (wind and wave energy) which are likely to become the focus of future national
priorities. The main institutions are already engaged in existing networks MARINE-
NET, OCEAN-NET; and are actively pursuing participation in both Networks of
Excellence (MI) and Integrated Partnership (UCC) bids for FP6. These follow on
from earlier EU collaborative work:
There is also evidence of application of Irish expertise, which may not necessarily be
energy-focussed to support multidisciplinary projects (e.g. NMRC contributes to
transport projects). These active participants appear to enjoy a good level of
integration with European projects, even operating as co-ordinators of some projects.
As research continues to become more interdisciplinary in nature, such collaborations
will enhance Irish participation in its areas of strength – rather than having to develop
new capabilities.
Furthermore, though not directly related, Ireland takes up its presidency of the EU in
January 2004. This may present opportunities for a focus on Euro-centred activity in
Ireland – including the energy field, which will continue to be a political focus.
Market liberalisation (which is still in train) may create conditions for other providers
to enter the Irish energy supply market. The danger is though that companies are
reluctant to invest in R&D while they are unsure of their long-term market share.
Measures have been taken to try and encourage their investment. There are already
favourable tax benefits for companies investing in renewable energy. Investment in
the market could bring with it a demand for Irish expertise in the relevant energy
sector. In December 2003, the Irish government announced the introduction of R&D
tax credits for companies, both Irish and multinational – a further encouragement to
perform R&D in Ireland.
1.1.2
Barriers for collaboration
The main problem for Irish researchers is the lack of significant funding to support
their work. Some have expressed the view that involvement in collaborative/FP6
projects and networks will be hampered by this lack of funding. Whilst recognising
the renewed focus on energy (SEI’s RDD programmes are one example) past efforts
have been driven by political considerations (meeting Kyoto commitments etc).
The limited indigenous energy market for Ireland will continue to present a barrier to
funding from national R&D – as long as Ireland is not producing the energy (or the
Ireland
270
equipment needed to produce energy) there will be a lower priority placed on calls for
support in Energy RTD – particularly research of a more basic nature.
Future prospects may be more favourable for efforts in the fields of wind and wave
energy – if the claims made for the potential resource in these can be realised, they
will provide a larger proportion of Irish energy needs (increasing indigenous energy
provision) and reduce reliance on imported fuel.
The oversight of Energy RTD lies with Sustainable Energy Ireland – this has benefits
as well as drawbacks. SEI operates what are effectively Irelands first targeted actions
with relation to Energy RTD. The main disadvantage appears to be a need to
strengthen institutional ties between SEI and research performers. SEI does not
currently fund basic research nor does it fund very much in the way of R&D work,
concentrating instead on Demonstration projects and initiatives to facilitate
commercial and industrial entry into RTD activity. Academic research departments
tend to have stronger links with their funding bodies (HEA, through PRTLI
119
etc)
Consequently there may be a risk of a lack of connection between SEI and the work
being carried out under other (non-SEI) initiatives.
1.2
Potential for ERA
1.2.1
Thematic complementarities/synergies
The main priorities for Ireland will be wind and wave energy. As stated above, Irish
researchers are already well placed to contribute to these fields through their
involvement in existing European projects.
While short term developments will be in onshore wind there is already a recognition
of the need to develop offshore wind capability. Permission was granted in 2002 for a
first offshore farm in the northwest of Ireland.
Recent consultation has suggested that rather than seeking to become world-leaders,
Ireland should engage in appropriate activities such that it can keep pace with new
developments in the field.
In common with (for example) Nordic countries Ireland is still attempting to reduce
its reliance on peat as a source of fuel. Running concurrently with efforts in this area,
the expansion of the electricity and gas
Whilst concentrating on wind/wave energy as national capabilities, there may be a
tendency to want to pursue other (all?) renewable technologies (CHP is discussed as a
new way forwards) – this can be common of countries looking for a ‘world-leading’
niche – but may not be realistic for a country with relatively low levels of investment
in energy R&D.
Transport is not currently a priority for SEI, but is likely to be in the near future. As in
most countries it makes a significant contribution to energy consumption in Ireland.
119
PRTLI – the Programme for Research in Third Level Institutions, administered by the Higher
Education Authority (HEA)
Ireland
271
Given its large contribution toward TPER, buildings is a focus – and will need to
remain so. Sustainable village projects present opportunities for collaboration with
similar actions in other countries
1.2.2
Institutional complementarities/synergies
The new national energy agency, Sustainable Energy Ireland (SEI) is the first Irish
energy authority to have its own RTD programme budget. Currently it has committed
only a portion of its budget to specific programmes (see below) possibly similar
experience to others?
Focus on renewable/sustainable as well as consumer awareness – We may be able to
find other national agencies in a similar position – a wide remit, encompassing not
only R&D, with a relatively small energy market, and much of this is reliant on
imported fuel.
The Marine Institute is involved in Marine-NET type activity – and wants to pursue
this activity under FP6. UCC is also anticipating involvement in Wave-NET/ Ocean-
NET in FP6.
Other commercial players are small but numerous (in wind and wave) and are active
at a regional/local level – and in line with national priorities (e.g. Sustainable Village
project focussing on housing). With the anticipated focus on public-private
partnerships in ERA, these companies may be well placed to take their experience and
expertise overseas. For Ireland, the liberalisation of the electricity market and support
for renewables will assist their entry into market This is true particularly for those
involved in AER projects, where they have purchase agreements lasting for 15 years.
1.2.3
Type of research
Whilst the majority of work to date has been focussed on meeting targets (Kyoto)
Most work is at development and demonstration phase – although increasing
‘research’ component to portfolio. Ireland aiming to develop core competence in
wind and wave energy, would do well to relate to others
Private actors may be encouraged by the liberalisation of market and support from
state (as demonstrated by AER programme) where market intervention may be
required. The lack of a market for new energy technologies often presents a barrier to
investment in their development, particularly when such technologies are in their
early stages of development.
There has been considerable effort made to bring large energy customers ‘onside’,
and demonstrated the cost efficiencies of energy savings (for example, through SEI’s
Large Industry Network). Consequently there should be potential for their
engagement in supporting Irish R&D efforts.
The success of the AER programme as a means of achieving the target for 500Mw of
renewable energy may act as an example to other countries. The Programme is
currently under evaluation before entering a new round –the results of this assessment
my be of interest from a programme management perspective as well as the energy
Ireland
272
technologies addressed. Whilst the programme has been effective as a means of
implementing targets, there will also have been potential for new understanding of
how to transfer technologies into the commercial market – perhaps this indicates why
‘less mature’ technologies have been less fruitful in achieving the goals of the
programme. Is there any experience which might be useful in a European network,
particularly where an activity is aimed more at the development and dissemination
(i.e. applied) aspects of RTD?
Long-term research will be required to support development of RE infrastructure –
once Ireland becomes more reliant on these, it will need the expertise to maintain and
improve its equipment. Longer-term research is likely to be focussed on storage
technologies and developments required to the supply grid in order to accommodate
the provision of power from a more diverse range of sources. There have already been
a number of studies outlining the likely future scenarios required
120121
1.2.4
Opportunities for international collaboration
If the potential for wind and wave can be realised, then Ireland has the potential to
become a focus for innovation in these fields – researchers encouraged to work here
to make real-time, field observations - and possibly develop an international centre of
competence (e.g. within Marine Institute or UCC).
Existing engagement will probably be the first avenue of entry into FP6/ERA-type
activity; although the relatively small Irish Energy R&D portfolio will need further
expansion if it is to make a sufficient contribution to collaborative projects (i.e. a fair
contribution, rather than a ‘sleeping partner’).
Given SEI’s relatively small RDD budget it might be appropriate to look for other
countries who are in a similar position – that is, not in a position to commit significant
resources to mature technologies, but still keen to stimulate a market. For instance,
micro-CHP has been investigated in many other countries (including the UK) and
biomass as a fuel for these plants is currently being researched by Sweden (amongst
others). Close collaboration with researchers from these countries may increase the
efficiency/effectiveness of Irish investment.
Another positive experience from AER must be the evaluation of success of
implementing technologies, and the resulting changes in focus for the programme.
Whilst this may have some negative effects (e.g. the timing of programme rounds has
been erratic) it has shown that energy technologies which are able to be implemented
on a commercial scale can be given a market for their output.
Other technologies such as onsite CHP and short rotation forestry (for fuel) which
have been taken further in other countries (e.g. Sweden) demonstrate how large
industries can implement renewable and sustainable energy technologies.
120
“Penetration of Wind Energy in Ireland: a Report prepared for the Irish Wind Energy
Association”, Econnect Consultants, 2000
121
“Study into the impacts of increased levels of wind penetration on the Irish electricity system”
CER/OFREG, 2002
Ireland
273
Emerging economies (where heavy industries may be prevalent in the commercial
sector) may wish to partner in the R&D of such technologies. For example, DCMNR
Renewable Energy Division has already received a delegation from Slovakia. At a
national level Ireland’s Research Council for Science and Technology (IRCSET) has
recently signed a significant research collaboration agreement with the French Centre
National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS).
Ireland has signed up to three IEA Implementing Agreements, in
•
Bioenergy – Ireland has responsibilities in three areas:
−
Socio-Economic Aspects of Bio-energy Systems
−
Greenhouse Gas Balances of Biomass & Bio-energy Systems
−
Liquid Bio-fuels
•
Ocean Energy Systems
•
Wind Energy
SEI is the representative body for Ireland in these Implementing Agreements. It is
expected that participation in the Agreements will supplement/complement Irish
investment in EU activities such as WAVE-NET as well as providing contact with
researchers and policymakers in other countries.
Although the projects funded under FP6 represent areas of strong capability in
Ireland, they do not necessarily reflect all the areas where SEI would be
interested in pursuing internationally collaborative projects. SEI has stated
that it would consider joining international collaborative projects involving:
•
eco-buildings
•
wind
•
wave
•
biomass
•
any aspect of the electricity grid
1.3
Concrete possible policy actions
1.3.1
Financial & funding implications & suggestions
The budget for energy-related R&D is small compared to other countries. It remains
to be seen whether it is sufficient to support meaningful Irish engagement in FP6 and
ERA activity – much of the work to date has been possible largely through FP
funding, rather than from Irish sources. The current economic climate in Ireland
reduces the prospect of any significant increase in funding in the short-term;
commitments under the Sustainable Energy Green Paper (and subsequent Act) have
been ‘frozen’.
1.3.2
Legal implications & suggestions (e.g. relating to status of national RTOs)
SEI is a relatively new body (albeit one with a lineage dating back to earlier
organisations), it is also rather small – c.40 people; if it is to be the focal point for
Irish energy R&D efforts it will need much more resource (people and money) to
maintain an oversight of all national activity/ participation in networks; currently it
Ireland
274
appears to be only beginning to build a picture of what is going on nationally – this
raises the issue of fragmentation of funding – there is money from other funders, e.g.
HEA/ EI but this is small and targeted at their own brief (education/industrial
development); while SEI’s budget is arguably large in Irish terms, it is comparatively
small in international terms – perhaps SEI’s brief needs clarifying/ strengthening.
The dual efforts of SEI and DCMNR might be thought to present a duplication of
renewable energy programmes, and in some respects there may be efficiencies to be
gained by rationalising the two streams into one organisation? This could lead toi
better strategic planning; e.g. SEI supports programmes in negotiated agreements,
could these be linked more closely with Enterprise Ireland and their industry-focused
support programmes? More importantly for FP6/ NNE-RTD, this could offer more
consistent identification of opportunities for Irish participation in networks; SEI
attends EU meetings, and would be well-placed to identify problems of relevance to
Irish suppliers/researchers.
1.3.3
Relations with other energy-related themes (transport, environment…)
Transport, whilst mentioned as a future area of investigation, is not currently a
priority for SEI. It is however recognised that the sector makes a significant demand
on energy resources. There is some small amount of activity DETE funds work on
hydrogen, and NMRC is involved in FP5 projects, where it is contributing its ICT
expertise. This multidisciplinary approach is likely to be a feature of FP6 work, and
whilst ERA-NETs may be focused along more ‘single-discipline’ lines, the projects
which participants are involved will enable them to make more complex relationships.
Needs to be in a position to exploit this – making connections to enable realisation of
goals in wind and wave, for example.
Environmental considerations are likely to be high on the agenda, with both wind and
wave energy having potential considerable environmental impact. The current work
done by Marine Institute amongst other has meant that Irish policy is well informed in
this regard (e.g. the priorities for R&D in SEI’s renewable energy programme
highlight many environmental issues – see Annexe A).
2
Overall energy situation of country
2.1
Ireland’s Energy Portfolio
Ireland has limited indigenous energy resources – in 2001, energy output from ‘Irish’
energy sources amounted to less than 2Mtoe, representing around 15% of total energy
output– the breakdown by fuel type is shown in
Exhibit 2-1
below. Peat still forms the
largest contribution - despite production being significantly reduced in recent years.
Ireland
275
Exhibit 2-1 Ireland indigenous fuel resources, proportion as Mtoe (2001)
Indigenous Energy by Fuel type (Mtoe)
Gas
33%
Peat
50%
Coal
6%
Hydro
0%
Other RE
11%
2.2
Fuel imports
Ireland is heavily reliant on imported fuel, increasingly so in recent years as demand
has increased alongside the rapid expansion in the Irish economy.
•
Between 1995 and 2001, dependency on imported energy sources grew from 65%
to 87%. This increase was due both to the closure of gas production facilities and
a decrease in the use of peat.
•
In 2001, oil and gas imports accounted for 74% of TPER– in 1990, they
represented only 45%.
2.3
Future Prospects
Future developments may change the balance of import vs indigenous fuels: in 2004,
a new gas field will come on-stream and there will be an increase in the use of
renewables resulting from AER-funded projects.
Renewable energy has contributed around 2% of TPER, being drawn primarily from
wind, biomass and hydro energy. In recent years, there has been a rapid growth in
wind power, although this is still a small contribution at around 0.14% of TPER (2001
figures). This is likely to increase further on the basis of current commitments (e.g.
through AER projects and continued commissioning of new onshore wind farms).
3
National RTDI system
3.1
Spending on RTD
In the middle of the 1990s, gross expenditure on research and development (GERD)
represented 1.3% of GDP compared to an average for EU member states of 1.82%, as
shown in Exhibit 3-1 below. The most recent data indicate that this gap has increased
Ireland
276
with Ireland falling further short of the EU average (1.21% compared to EU average
of 1.88% in 2000). During the late 90s, Ireland’s GDP grew at an annual average rate
of 8.5%, compared to the EU average of 2.3%, and was expected to reach 117 billion
Euro in 2001.
This period has also seen significant development in the institutional framework
supporting R&D.
Exhibit 3-1 Overview of R&D Expenditure
Indicator
1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000
Total R&D Personnel per
1000 labour force
6
6.6
6.6
7.0
7.2
7.3
GERD as % GDP
1.31
1.34
1.32
1.29
1.26
1.21
% GERD financed by Govt
20.9
21.4
24.2
24.3
23.1
21.8
% GERD financed by
Industry
68.9
68.7
66.8
67.3
65.4
64.1
BERD as % GDP
0.91
0.96
0.93
0.91
0.91
0.88
HERD as % GDP
.26
.26
.26
.27
.26
.26
GOVERD as % GDP
.13
.11
.11
.10
.09
.07
.07
Source: OECD MSTI Database 2002
In the business sector, the ratio of R&D expenditure to GDP more than doubled from
0.5% in 1990 to 1.3% in 1997.
Although
business expenditure on R&D in Ireland is comparatively low compared to
the EU average, data
122
shows that BERD has grown at a rate of 20 per cent per
annum in real terms during the 1990s. Business expenditure on research and
development (BERD) amounted to 679 MEuro in 1997.
Industrial R&D expenditure is dominated by a few large foreign owned multinational
firms. These firms spend approximately twice as much on R&D as the whole of the
indigenous manufacturing base (according to Forfás data).
Irish-owned companies are more likely to perform R&D on a small-scale (less than
IR£100,000 per annum), than are foreign firms. Smaller foreign owned companies
tend not to have little commitment to R&D.
Most multinational activity in Ireland is focused on manufacturing. Much of
innovation policy in Ireland is addressed at increasing investments in R&D by
multinational firms.
3.2
Research performed in Higher Education
HE research is supported primarily from public funding (66% of total funding). Of
this total, the breakdown of contributions from various sources is given in
Exhibit 3-2
122
Forfás Survey of Product and Process Innovation in Irish Industry 1993-1995
Ireland
277
Exhibit 3-2 Breakdown of funding for HE Research (2000), by funding source
University
'Block Grant'
46%
EU
programmes
16%
Foreign
Business
3%
other
5%
Direct
Government
Grants
23%
Irish Business
7%
Source: Public Accounts (2001)
3.3
Main public research
R&D performed in higher education and government institutes accounts for less than
30% of GERD. Recent efforts (such as the creation of Science Foundation Ireland –
see below) mean that there is significant growth in this area.
However there have been significant revisions to original funding commitments. The
National Development Plan (NDP) committed significant increased funding for
research in the natural resources, but much of this investment is behind schedule.
For example, in 2003 the NDP Marine research budget was reduced from a scheduled
amount of
€
4.4 million to
€
1.4 million, a reduction of
€
3 million (68% in one year).
The NDP set out five sub-measures for RTD funding, each of these is described
below (Exhibit 3-3)
Exhibit 3-3 National Development Plan RTD sub-measures (2000-2006)
Sub-measure
Description
Basic Research
Funding
Basic research funds totalling approximately 1.19 billion Euro
have been earmarked for the period 2000-2006. These funds
are channelled through two routes:
•
from the Department of Enterprise, Trade and
Employment, via
OST
•
from the Department of Education and Science, via the
Higher Education Authority (HEA)
Collaborative &
Strategic Applied
Research
Public funding for collaborative and strategic R&D is
administered primarily by
Enterprise Ireland
. Funding is
allocated to the universities, institutes of technology and (in
Ireland
278
the case of the sectoral funding) public research institutes
mainly on a competitive basis.
The funds administered by Enterprise Ireland (totalling
around 230 million for the period 2000-2006) are allocated
through a number of programmes (see below).
Business Research
and Development
Support for industrial R&D is handled by
Enterprise Ireland
and
IDA Ireland
, the agency with national responsibility for
securing new investment from overseas in manufacturing and
international services sectors and for encouraging existing
foreign enterprises in Ireland to expand their businesses.
Research
Infrastructure
Research infrastructure under the NDP is addressed primarily
through the
Programme for Research in Third Level
Institutions PRTLI
(see below)
Business Innovation
Support
Enterprise Ireland offers a range of business and innovation
supports to Irish-based companies, categorising these as
•
Business Planning & Information
•
Research, Development & Design
•
Production & Operations
•
Marketing & Business Development
•
Human Resource Development
•
Finance for Growth
3.4
Funding institutions
Key funding institutions are
•
Higher Education Authority
•
Enterprise Ireland
•
the two Research Councils (IRCSET and IRCHSS)
Each of these operates a number of funding mechanisms, which are described in more
detail in the relevant section.
3.4.1
Higher Education Authority (HEA)
HEA is the principal agency of the Department of Education and Science dealing with
higher education. It regulates the higher education sector, channelling both the
university block grants and the money to the research councils.
HEA administers the
Programme for Research in Third Level Institutions
(
PRTLI)
. Established in 1998 the objective of PRTLI is to enhance the research
capabilities of third level institutions through the funding of institutional research
strategies. Key objectives of the PRLTI are (a) to promote the development of high
quality research capabilities in the third level sector, (b) enhance the quality and
relevance of graduate output and (c) encourage inter-institutional collaboration,
particularly in the Irish context. The programme requires the institutions to develop
and implement their own research strategies based on a self-assessment of their
existing and emerging research strengths. In developing these strategies, institutions
Ireland
279
have to prioritise their research, and applications for PRTLI funding should be
consistent with the research strategy adopted.
Funding supports research in many disciplines including the bioscience, biomedicine,
environment, marine, ICT, engineering, materials, social sciences and the humanities.
Although some PRTLI funds support basic research, the majority of PRTLI
allocations are directed to new infrastructure.
3.4.2
Enterprise Ireland (EI)
Enterprise Ireland operates as an agency of Forfas. The greater part of its spending is
in support of business development, but it has increased the proportion of its activity
directed towards R&D funding. Around 51 MEuro (17%) of its 2001 funding was
directed towards “Science and Technology Infrastructure”.
Enterprise Ireland’s Board comprises 12 people - nine of whom are company
representatives (of which, two are foreign-owned companies). R&D subsidies are
approved by a committee of 16 people, (comprising 12 civil servants, 2 academics
and 2 industrialists).
To date, Enterprise Ireland has administered two of the principal funding routes for
R&D activity: Science Foundation Ireland (SFI) and the Basic Research Grant
Scheme.
3.4.2.1
Science Foundation Ireland (SFI)
SFI was set up in 2001 (under Forfás) to administer the Technology Foresight Fund.
The findings of the Foresight exercise determined that the focus of funding should be
in the two areas of Biotechnology and Information and Communication Technologies
(ICT).
3.4.2.2
Basic Research Grants Scheme
The Basic Research Grant Scheme was introduced in the early 1980s to provide a
source of
competitive
project funding for HEIs. The scheme has an annual open call
for proposals and independent peer review. Since 1993 the programme has been
operated by Enterprise Ireland. From 2004, it will be operated by IRCSET in
conjunction with SFI.
3.4.3
Research Councils
Ireland has two Research Councils
•
Irish Research Council for the Humanities and Social Sciences (IRCHSS)
•
Irish Research Council for Science Engineering and Technology (IRCSET)
3.4.3.1
Irish Research Council for Science, Engineering and Technology (IRCSET)
IRCSET was set up in 2001, with a budget of over 95 MEuro for the period 2002 –
2006. Its main function was envisaged as support for research students in science and
engineering. It also joined forces with the Basic Research Grants Programme in
Enterprise Ireland to double the level of project funding for the programme in 2002.
Ireland
280
(although this is seen as a one-off collaboration pending further clarification of the
role in research of the two organisations).
IRCSET has a Council of 24 members - including 18 from academic and learned
institutes, and 2 company representatives.
3.4.3.2
Irish Research Council for the Humanities and Social Sciences (IRCHSS)
IRCHSS was established by the Minister for Education and Science in 2000. It
comprises 9 academics, one senior university administrator and a representative of the
administration of the Conference of Heads of Irish Universities. Research is funded
through the Department of Education and Science. To date, 5.71 MEuro has been
allocated to the IRCHSS and a further 47 MEuro will be allocated until 2006.
4
Brief description of NNE RTD organisation
Exhibit 4-1
below illustrates the most recent data on the balance of focus of RTD
activity in the field of non-nuclear energy. According to IEA data, the total budget for
NNE-RTD was equivalent to 3.46Million US$ (at 2002 prices and exchange rates). It
can be seen that the vast majority of spending was directed towards ‘conservation’
activity. More than 80% of work in this sector was aimed at the “residential and
commercial building” sector - with much of the remainder (14%) being spent on
industry and only 2% focussing on the transport sector.
16% of total activity is directed toward renewable technologies (solar/ wind/ hydro/
ocean/ biomass). Ocean energy accounts for the largest single contribution (7%) of
renewable energy technology R&D.
Exhibit 4-1 Focus on NNE-RTD in Ireland, distribution by technology (2002)
Conservation
70%
Fossil Fuels
0%
Solar
1%
Wind
5%
Ocean
7%
Power and
Storage Tech.
12%
Other Tech./
Research
1%
Hydro
1%
Biomass
3%
Geothermal
0%
Source: IEA (2001)
Ireland
281
5
Main actors
5.1
Sustainable Energy Ireland (SEI)
5.1.1
SEI - function and responsibilities
SEI is the Irish national agency for energy efficiency and renewable energy
information, advice and support. It was inaugurated in the Sustainable Energy Act
2002, and replaced the former Irish Energy Centre – although SEI has a much wider
remit.
SEI is an agency of the Department of Communication, Marine and Natural
Resources (DCMNR) whereas the Energy Centre was responsible to the Department
of Enterprise Trade and Employment (and Enterprise Ireland). The shift of
responsibility from one Department to another is a further indication of the refocusing
of Irish policy on renewables.
SEI’s responsibilities include:
•
Stimulating sustainable energy supply
•
Stimulating sustainable use
•
Helping to reduce greenhouse gas emissions
•
Helping to stimulate competitive indigenous industry
•
Contributing to rural development
Exhibit 5-1 below sets out the relationship between SEI and various Government
Departments with whom it has relationships. SEI is foremost an agency of DCMNR,
but it interacts with the Department of the Environment (which has overall
responsibility for climate change) and the Department of Enterprise (which has
overall responsibility for emissions trading).
Exhibit 5-1 SEI and its Relationship with DCMNR and other Government
Departments
The multifaceted role of SEI is perhaps a recognition of the view that, in order to
Department of
Environment
Department of Communication,
Marine and Natural Resources
(DCMNR)
Parent
Department
Department of
Enterprise, Trade &
Employment
Sustainable
Energy Ireland
Climate Change
Strategy
Emissions Trading
Ireland
282
achieve the ambitious targets set in the Green Paper, all areas of society will need to
be targeted to reconsider their energy use.
5.1.2
R&D at SEI
Typically SEI funding will be provided for applied research – ‘basic research’ is
expected to be funded (at least from national funds) through grants from programmes
such as PRTLI or Basic Research Grants Scheme (see above).
In its first five-year strategy, SEI has prioritised RDD programmes in housing,
renewable energy technologies, CHP/DH, Industry and Commercial Sector Energy
use, Negotiated Agreements. The aims and budget for each of these are described
briefly in
Exhibit 5-2
below.
Exhibit 5-2 SEI RDD programmes
House of Tomorrow
(
21Meuro)
Stimulating widespread uptake of superior
sustainable energy planning, design, specification and construction practices in both
the new home building and home improvement markets. (Primarily a consumer
awareness programme)
Renewable Energy RDD Programme
(
16.25 Meuro)
Various renewables including:
Wind Energy/ Wave Energy/ Biomass/ Geothermal/ Solar/ Hydropower/ Fuel Cells.
The Programme is not intended to support universities or other third-level institutions
in undertaking fundamental research. Third-level institutions wishing to undertake
fundamental research should contact the relevant body for such funding (such as the
Irish Research Council for Engineering Science & Technology or the Programme for
Research in Third Level Institutions, administered by the Higher Education Authority
(HEA)).
The indicative split of the
€
16.25M funding for RE related RD&D is as follows:
•
Wind and Biomass
6.3- 10 MEuro
•
Other RE Technologies 3.8 – 6.3 MEuro
•
Cross-Sector RD&D
1.3 – 3.8 MEuro
The priorities for each of these areas are presented in detail in Appendix 2.
Combined Heat and Power (CHP) and District Heating (DH)
(
5.08 Meuro)
Aims
to stimulate deployment of CHP / DH technologies. Potential technologies supported:
Micro CHP (< 20 kWe)/ CHP with absorption chilling/ CHP with district heating/ RE
based CHP/ CHP incorporating fuel cell technology.
Target: 250 MWe of installed
CHP capacity by 2010
Negotiated Agreements
(
6.2 Meuro)
Aims to address mechanisms which can
encourage industry to use sustainable energy – pursuant to National Climate Strategy.
Industry and Commercial Sector R&D
(13 MEuro)
Aims to support the
development and adoption of energy efficient technologies (recently completed pilot
phase)
SEI allows project teams to be funded under these programmes whilst also
participating in other relevant international research networks - such as EU or IEA.
Ireland
283
5.1.3
Other activity at SEI
5.1.3.1
Large Industry Energy Network (LIEN)
SEI also coordinates the Large Industry Energy Network (LIEN) - a network of 80
industries – accounting for around 35% of the energy demand in the industrial sector.
The Network was established in 1994 to share information on energy technology, and
in anticipation of new policy initiatives on energy efficiency and emissions, which are
likely to impact on large industry. Through this network SEI was able to coordinate
some of the work in the Negotiated Agreements research programme.
5.1.3.2
Public Consultation
SEI recently carried out a public consultation exercises into attitudes to Wind Energy:
Attitudes Towards the Development of Wind Farms in Ireland
123
. The generally
favourable views gathered in the consultation will undoubtedly have a facilitating
effect (e.g. easing planning concerns etc) on future prospects for onshore wind
developments.
5.1.4
FP6 at SEI
SEI also has responsibility for coordinating Irish submissions for FP6. In December
2002, it led a campaign to promote FP6 funding opportunities – currently this has
resulted in two successful submissions. Research teams are not
obliged
however to
use SEI as a channel for applications to FP6.
5.2
Department of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources
(DCMNR)
DCMNR is the ‘parent Department’ of Sustainable Energy Ireland, and also has its
own Divisions of Renewable and Sustainable Energy. These are responsible
implementing Irish Government policy. Additionally the Division manages the
Alternative Energy Requirement programme – a demonstration/commercial R&D
programme designed to meet the targets of the Green Paper on Sustainable Energy
5.2.1
Alternative Energy Requirement (AER) programme
The AER Programme was launched in 1995, and was designed to support
infrastructure/ ‘plant’ projects which would supply energy from renewable resources.
The programme has been the primary mechanism by which the 2005 target for an
additional 500Mwe from renewable sources will be achieved. Given the target of
bringing actual energy generation on-stream, the programme has a predominantly
‘demonstration’ (and even market development?) focus –although there may be some
elements to certain projects which can contribute to better understanding of the R&D
requirements for these technologies the evaluation of success of implementing
technologies, and the resulting changes in focus for the programme. The evaluation of
the Programme, which is currently underway should help identify these opportunities.
123
The report can be downloaded at SEI’ website on
http://www.sei.ie/uploads/documents/upload/publications/Attitudes_towards_wind_.pdf
Ireland
284
The rationale for support is that
“…electricity generation from renewable energy
based technologies are not as yet competitive with conventional fossil fuel technology
and …market support is required because these technologies operate from a higher
cost base than conventional (fossil fuel) technologies.”
124
The programme is focused primarily on energy providers – including SME companies
– and encourages them to demonstrate potential for sustainable energy supply from
renewables. Following the 100% liberalisation of the green electricity market
(allowing ‘renewable suppliers’ access to the electricity supply grid) this has created
an extra incentive for projects under the programme (i.e. once the facility is in place
and producing energy, access to grid is provided for all participants). Prospective
generators bid to build and operate newly installed electricity-generating plant based
on renewable energy. Successful bids are given a Power Purchase Agreement (PPA)
of up to 15 years duration, guaranteeing supply to the Electricity Supply Board (ESB)
and the network.
To date, six AER competitions have been held. In each subsequent competition, the
focus of technology has changed, but proposals have been funded on their potential to
contribute to the ‘500Mwe target’. Supported technologies include wind energy,
small-scale hydropower, combined heat and power (CHP) and biomass (landfill gas).
The sixth competition (AER VI) was launched in February 2003 and resulted in
sufficient number of projects and potential supply to realize the 500Mw target.
Exhibit 5-3 below describes the technologies focused upon in each Round of the
Programme.
Exhibit 5-3 Successive AER Programmes and their Technology Focus
AER Programme
1
II
III
IV
V
VI
Technology
Supported
Date
Apr
‘96
Feb
‘97
Apr
‘98
Aug
‘98
Feb’
02
July
‘03
Landfill gas
Anaerobic
digestion
Biomass
CHP
Combined Heat & Power (CHP)
Small scale hydro
Waste to energy
Wave energy
Wind energy
Large-scale
Small-scale
Off-Shore
The table represents the technologies
under focus
, rather than those which
actually
came on-stream
under the relevant programme. This is in order to give a sense of the
124
AER Programme Information, DCMNR 2003
Ireland
285
‘design and development’ issues which might have been under consideration at the
time. Indeed, some technologies were not successful (e.g. waste-to-energy has not
been implemented under AER).
5.2.2
Future of AER programme
Currently the programme is under review in order to inform the most appropriate
mechanisms to support new targets (covering the period from 2005 to 2010).
5.3
Marine Institute (MI)
The Marine Institute (MI) has been involved in supporting a range of projects.
Working with DCMNR and SEI, the Institute has taken a lead role in the promotion
of research into wave energy technology.
MI has funded the building of national R&D capacity through support for the turbine
test-beds at the Department of Mechanical and Aeronautical Engineering at the
National University of Ireland, Limerick (NUIL), and wave tank testing facilities at
the Hydraulic and Maritime Research Centre (HMRC) at University College Cork
(UCC).
5.3.1
FP involvement at MI
The MI funds twice-yearly Energy "Marie Curie" Research Training Fellowships
Conferences, first held in 1997. These conferences have effectively formed a
"Cluster" of the Training Fellowship activities within the Energy programme, and at
the same time providing a method of monitoring the progress of projects. Current
Fellows are being funded under FP4 and FP5.
5.3.2
FP6 at MI
MI is participating in the formation of a MARINE ERA-NET linking European
Marine RTD Programme Managers. While ocean energy is a small part of this
agenda they are keen to develop the concept of an OCEAN ENERGY ERA-NET.
There is already collaboration with other Member States including Portugal.
MI will host the EUROCEAN 2004 Conference (www.eurocean2004.com) in Galway
in May 2004– where OCEAN ENERGY ERA-NET will be further promoted.
5.3.3
Other activity
In November 2002, Sustainable Energy Ireland and The Marine Institute carried out a
consultation process aimed at building a consensus around a strategic approach to
ocean energy development in Ireland.
Responses to the consultation included suggestions and recommendations from Irish
and international experts in the field of wave energy. These responses have provided a
input to the creation of a Development Scenario for Ocean Energy, which is currently
being prepared by MI, in association with SEI.
This strategy will include the production of an Industry roadmap (which will highlight
the potential economic benefit to Ireland of developing the sector) and a Protocol for
Ireland
286
Ocean Energy device developers (identifying the essential R&D and technical
requirements at each stage of the development of an Ocean Energy device).
6
Current NNE RTD priorities relevant for ERA in NNE
RTD
Current priorities for energy R&D have resulted from a period of legislative and
organisational change with regard to energy in Ireland. Two documents form the basis
for the current position: the report of the
Energy Panel of Technology Foresight
Ireland
and the
Sustainable Energy Green Paper 1999
.
6.1.1
Energy Technology Foresight Panel 1998
Ireland's first Technology Foresight exercise, conducted by the Irish Council for
Science, Technology and Innovation (ICSTI)
125
identifies key technologies in eight
sector areas for the national economic development. In each technology area,
recommendations were made to address the associated “opportunities and
challenges”. Energy was one of the areas under consideration.
The report of the Energy Panel of the Foresight Exercise, of April, 1999 considered
two key questions:
•
How to maximise the benefits to Ireland of innovation in the energy sector?
•
How to manage and meet Ireland's energy demand up to 2015?
The Panel suggested that the response to the first question should be to identify new
technologies, research, development and demonstration needs and business
opportunities, which result from innovation in the energy sector. The second question
would entail examining the energy technology response to Ireland's commitments
under the Kyoto Climate Change Protocol, while maintaining international
competitiveness and security of supply.
The Panel argued that Ireland should “position itself in those energy technologies
which offer the best commercial opportunities” – these were felt to be wave energy,
hybrid energy systems, energy storage, environmentally-friendly transport, and
intelligent consumer products.
The Panel recommended an initial three-year programme, covering the following
areas:
125
The Irish Council for Science, Technology & Innovation was established in 1997, in order to provide
expert advice to Government on all aspects relating to the strategic direction of science, technology and
innovation (STI) policy. Its role encompasses all aspects of STI policy including
•
primary, second and third level education
•
scientific research, technology and research and development in industry
•
prioritisation of state spending in STI
•
public awareness of STI issues
The Council has twenty-five members drawn from industry, academia and government
departments/agencies.
Ireland
287
•
New and renewable energy technologies for the electricity, thermal and transport
markets, including wave energy, hybrid energy systems, energy storage systems
and alternative transport systems
•
Development of intelligent consumer energy products, such as photosensitive
lighting controls, motion and heat detectors, and the ‘home of tomorrow’
•
Energy efficient and renewable energy technologies in buildings, such as design
for passive solar heating, lighting and cooling,
•
Optimising the provision, distribution and utilisation of energy at all levels of
energy consumption
Many of these themes are reflected in the later work undertaken (e.g. by SEI).
6.2
Sustainable Energy Green Paper
In 1999 the Irish Government published its Sustainable Energy Green Paper, which
set out the future priorities for development of the energy market in Ireland, and the
means by which the targets for sustainable and renewable energy production would be
reached.
The recommendations of the Green Paper (as well as those of the Foresight Panel) fed
into the National Development Plan(2000-2006) – discussed above, which set out the
priorities for the work of Government (in all areas) for the period under consideration.
The Green Paper concluded that, as Ireland ‘does not produce much of the capital
equipment’ needed by the energy industry and consumers, there was correspondingly
narrower demand for relevant R&D than in larger countries. However it did suggest a
short list of national priorities:
•
An
inventory of energy R&D
in progress in the public, private and third level
sectors to complement existing international databases
•
More
collaborative R&D
between industry, the public sector, and third level
colleges should be encouraged to best exploit the resources of all sectors
•
The
built environment
requires R&D actions to answer problems specific to
Ireland
•
The
transport sector
needs particular support actions
•
CHP systems for small users
should be evaluated, and if prospects are good,
developed
•
Further
develop techniques for assessing the wind regime at on-shore sites
and
consider the
development of site assessment techniques for off-shore wind
.
•
Provide general training for professionals and craftsmen in design, specification,
and workmanship for energy conservation technologies
•
For the longer term, develop collaborative research in wave power
Following consultation, the Green Paper contributed to the publication of Ireland’s
National Climate Change Strategy in 2000. Later it would lead to the Sustainable
Energy Act 2002, which set up the national energy authority, SEI.
Ireland
288
6.2.1
National Climate Change Strategy 2000
The National Climate Change Strategy was published in 2000 and outlines the
strategy for meeting Ireland’s commitment to limit greenhouse gases to a 13%
increase over 1990 levels by 2008-2012, further to the Kyoto Protocol.
The strategy discusses various R&D measures which can be undertaken in a number
of sectors (including housing, agriculture, energy supply and transport). Although
specific R&D targets are not set out, the document became the basis for future policy
development and prioritisation
6.2.2
The Sustainable Energy Act 2002
The Sustainable Energy Act 2002 authorised the creation of a national energy
authority (Sustainable Energy Ireland) with overall responsibility for implementation
of Irish energy policy. The Act set out the priorities for focus of SEI’s activity and
determined the issues which would be the subject of RTD programmes, as well as
indicative budgets for these.
6.3
Other activities which have informed priorities
6.3.1
Public Consultation on Wind Energy
The recent public consultation by SEI (see Section 5.1.3 below) has presented a
positive future for wind technology in Ireland. While the AER programme has
ensured at least a short-term market for the technology, increased participation in
European networks (IEA and FP6) should encourage more development of expertise,
and – more importantly – the transfer of knowledge from ‘market-leading’ countries.
Since the inauguration of SEI, the AER programme has continued to be operated by
the Renewable Energy Division of DCMNR. While there remains close liaison
between the two - SEI is an agency ‘under’ DCMNR and representatives from both sit
on all relevant ‘energy committees and participate in meetings - the programme has
not thus far been subsumed into SEI’s R&D portfolio.
6.3.2
SEI Strategy Groups
SEI has also instigated the idea of strategy groups in developing policy. To date two
have been prioritised – in CHP and in Biomass.
The Biomass Strategy Group’s membership is drawn from SEI/DCMNR/Department
of Environment/Department of Agriculture and industry representatives. The Group’s
target is to produce (within 12 months) a roadmap for the development of use of
biomass. It is expected to report in early 2004.
The CHP Strategy Group will be convened in early 2004 and report at the end of the
year.
Ireland
289
Annexe A
Priorities for SEI Renewable Energy RDD Programme
Energy Type
Research and Development Priorities
Development Priorities
Wind Energy
•
Irish Wind Resource Analysis
•
Survey on Public Attitude to Wind Energy
•
Wind forecasting
•
Study of the impact of wind farms on Irish
Landscape/Environment
Small scale (0.5 to 5MW) wind energy auto production plants
•
Privately owned/Industrial Wind Turbines for Auto production
•
Domestic/Small Commercial Wind Turbines (1 to 100 kW) for
Auto production
Offshore
•
Assessment of support mechanisms for offshore wind
energy
•
Assessment of the breakdown of costs in constructing
offshore wind farms in Irish waters
•
Assessments of the environmental impacts of offshore
wind energy development
•
Resource prediction and energy storage.
Biomass
•
Support for feasibility studies for biomass projects
•
R&D support for biomass fuel supply and manufacturing
of processing equipment and components
•
Assessment of specific resources (to complement/update
existing EU Altener and other reports); e.g.
agricultural/forestry residues & waste wood, feasible
landfill gas resource by county etc.
•
Desk-top study of scale of plant (electricity/thermal) to
suit Irish conditions
•
Development of fuel supply strategies
•
Information Campaign for biomass
•
Wood/Agricultural
Biomass Combined Heat and Power Plants
•
Medium Scale (> 20MWe).
•
Small to Medium (1 to 20) MW
•
Biomass Heating Plants;
•
Small Scale (1 to 10 MW) Industrial Biomass Heating Plants..
•
Biomass Heating Systems (0.1 to 1 MW) for Large Buildings.
•
Biogas AD Heat or Power Plants
•
Small Scale (30 kW to 1 MW) Biogas AD Plants.
Solar
•
Collection of data on direct and indirect solar radiation on
an hourly basis in Ireland for simulation and feasibility
calculations of solar systems
•
R&D on lower cost manufacturing processes
•
Large scale (>100m2) Collective Solar Thermal Systems in
Buildings
•
Medium to large scale (20 to 100m2) Combi Solar Thermal
Systems (Combined Space Heating and Hot Water Production) in
Ireland
290
•
Training and certification schemes for suppliers/installers
of solar energy
•
Development of Guidelines or Codes of Practice
(potentially leading to legislation) for installation and
maintenance, design and specification, and for Green/Solar
procurement for public buildings
•
R&D of advanced materials in order to improve
efficiency of PV systems particularly suited to Irish
conditions of diffuse sunlight;
•
Research on grid-connected PV electricity generation
large buildings
Solar - PV
•
•
PV in domestic housing or commercial/industrial buildings
•
Stand-alone PV applications
•
•
Ocean Energy
•
Large Scale (0.1 to 1MW) Floating Wave Energy
Prototype Devices
•
Study to identify best locations for wave and tidal
energy devices around Ireland’s coast
•
Modelling of wave energy device performance and
survivability both theoretically and in wave tanks
Large Scale (0.1 to 1MW) Floating Wave Energy Prototype Devices
Small Hydro
•
Small Scale (30 kW to 1 MW) Hydro Power Plants (either new,
or refurbishment and repowering of existing plant)- high
efficiency standardised, modular turbine design with full remote
control, condition monitoring , high reliability and high
availability.
Ambient Heat (Heat
Pumps)
•
R&D of innovative non-polluting working fluids
(refrigerants) and adaptation of legislation to enforce their
use in heat pumps as well as refrigeration equipments
•
Large Scale Ambient Energy (ground or water source) Heat
Pump Systems. large scale (> 100 kW) vapour compression
systems
•
medium scale Ambient Energy Heat Pump Systems in Buildings.
for (30 to 100 kW) vapour compression systems
Geothermal Energy
•
Studies to identify the potential or likely best locations for
geothermal energy, and for the deployment of geothermal
energy technologies;
•
Demonstration projects may be considered for large-scale
geothermal heating projects
Ireland
291
•
Developing a Geothermal Energy Strategy based on
results of the above study
•
Small-Scale Field Verification (construction and testing
of prototype systems)
Hybrid or Cross-
Sector RD&D Actions
•
Development of strategic action and implementation
plans for RE technologies near to commercial viability;
•
Recommendations on implementing Net Metering;
•
Research on benefits of a Green Certificate market;
•
Hydrogen Fuel-cells and other Energy Storage
Technologies;
•
Recommendations on Green Procurement by Government
Agencies/Bodies (including meeting Green Paper/EC
targets on a departmental basis e.g. 13.2% green
electricity, 12% of energy from RES).
Community Schemes
Embedded generation
•
network potential to connect to facilitate forward planning and
reinforcement
•
long term economic and technical implications/ costs and
benefits of renewable energy embedded generators
•
preparation of updated codes, standards and guidelines on
system design and operation, connection, protection, switching
and metering of embedded generation/ appropriate tariffs and
system charges
•
other specific issues raised by the RE and CHP industries such
as, ‘non-standard’ voltages for connections, and requirements for
‘T’ connections to the distribution network, access to competitive
standby and backup power capacity
Israel
293
Country study Israel
Israel
295
Contents:
1 Summary of country study indicating main points for synergy
297
2 Main points for collaboration, synergy, complementarity with regard to the
NNE RTD ERA
298
2.1
Existing opportunities for ERA
298
2.1.1
Thematic complementarities
298
2.1.2
Trans-border cooperation
298
2.1.3
Bilateral cooperation
298
2.1.4
Regional versus national actors in ERA
300
2.2
Concrete possible policy actions
300
2.2.1
Legal implications & suggestions
300
2.2.2
The use of new cooperative instruments of the European Union
300
3 Short background information
301
3.1
The overall energy situation of Israel
301
3.1.1
Distribution of energy sources
301
3.1.2
Market concentration
305
3.2
The national RTDI system
305
3.2.1
Public private spending on RTD
305
3.2.2
Funding institutions
306
4 Brief description of NNE RTD organisation
309
4.1
Main actors
309
5 The NNE RTD Priority setting process
310
5.1
Description of the Priority setting process
310
5.2
Current NNE RTD priorities relevant for ERA in NNE RTD
312
5.2.1
The Energy Master Plan recommendations
312
5.2.2
Overall priorities of Israeli public authorities
312
5.2.3
The NNE RTD priorities of the Ministry of National Infrastructures
313
5.2.4
The NNE RTD priorities of the Ministry of Industry and Trade
315
Israel
297
1
Summary of country study indicating main points for
synergy
As an “isolated island” with an energy endowment almost limited to solar energy, oil
shales and natural gas, Israel policy decision makers are eager to cooperate with
international partners to develop new and more efficient energy technologies as
substitutes to expensive and unstable imported fossil resources. Israel has strong
comparative advantage in innovative and challenging solar energy technologies,
especially solar thermal. Since financing for these technologies are scarce,
cooperation with foreign partners is a way to push these technologies further toward
commercialization.
However, cooperation opportunities remain somewhat unclear in practice. This is
principally due to three factors:
•
The specific “outsider” position of Israel within ERA. It is clear that ERA is not
structuring nor influencing Israeli RTD activities at the moment. ERA does not
intervene in the Israeli RTD policy decision process. Even more, EU RTD
activities as a whole are perceived less as an opportunity as the disappointment
generated by FP6 grows among public and private Israeli stakeholders.
•
Specific political problems of Israel since the beginning of the second intifada.
The on-going conflicts draw the attention of politicians toward short to mid term
concerns. In this context, NNE RTD appears to many politicians as a “luxury”
Israel cannot afford. The very low priority of NNE RTD in Israeli politicians
agenda in the current period of political turmoil and economic slowdown partly
explains that cooperation opportunities are rather overlooked in that domain.
•
The Office of Chief Scientist at the Ministry of National Infrastructures (formerly
Ministry of Energy), who is in charge of public support to NNE RTD activities,
can barely launch strong strategic initiatives in this area. Opportunities for this
Ministry are all the weaker since its budget has gone through severe cuts as the
Israeli economy is experiencing a slowdown (Energy RTD at the Ministry of
National Infrastructures accounted for $2m in 2003 and was reduced by half in
2004).
•
The overall RTD budget of the Ministry of Industry is an order of magnitude
greater than that of the Ministry of National Infrastructures. However, the
“principle of neutrality” that governs the allocation of grants from the Office of
Chief Scientist at the Ministry of Industry and Trade does not allow any national
technology/sector strategies. The bulk of the public RTD expenses are therefore
going through open calls for applications, selected on an individual basis. This
“neutral policy” does not favour RTD toward more efficient or environmentally-
friendly energy technologies which need strong and voluntary initiatives.
In this difficult context, joint calls for applications within bilateral relationships
remain the main vehicle for RTD cooperation between Israel and foreign partner
countries. There is currently no RTD bilateral relationships dedicated to NNE RTD.
Israel
298
2
Main points for collaboration, synergy, complementarity
with regard to the NNE RTD ERA
2.1
Existing opportunities for ERA
2.1.1
Thematic complementarities
As it is detailed in section 4, Israeli public support for NNE RTD is increasingly
focused on solar energy, both photovoltaic and thermal. This area, which ranks high
in the agenda of the EU (especially PV) and of ERA countries (Spain for instance for
solar thermal with the Almeria center) includes many opportunities for potential
cooperation within ERA.
First of all, Israel stakeholders have strong scientific and industrial capabilities in this
area, exploring very challenging and innovative options (for instance highly
concentrated solar thermal). The interviewees also emphasised that, given the country
climatic conditions, Israel could be a very appropriate testing ground for solar energy
technologies developed elsewhere (within the frame of a cooperation with Israel or
not). Other examples of international cooperation have proved that demonstration and
testing activities can be a very efficient way to start international partnerships out of
which can emerge research/development cooperation.
It was clearly claimed during interviews that Israeli public decision makers involved
in NNE RTD EC programs felt like that they did not have any hold on the EC priority
setting process. They feel as “outsiders” as we were told. As a result,
complementarities are most of the time weak. Solar thermal particularly was said to
be overlooked within EC RTD programs.
2.1.2
Trans-border cooperation
Although Israel does not share borders with any ERA country, the specificity of the
country position leads us to devote some scrutiny to this issue. Throughout its history,
Israel has initiated several NNE related project cooperation with neighbouring
countries, especially Jordan (for instance for operating a wind power park) and Egypt.
These attempts were often hampered by regional political conflicts or, at least,
reluctance at the political level from the partners. However, recent events tend to
show that cooperative relationships with Egypt are increasing.
For ERA countries, relationships with Israel could in the future open larger
cooperation opportunities in the middle-east region.
2.1.3
Bilateral cooperation
Given the international position of Israel, bilateral relationships are the main vehicle
for cooperation with foreign partners.
Israel has set-up several bi-National R&D funds. The most important ones are BIRD
(Bi-national Industrial R&D American Israeli Foundation) with the US, BRITECH
(Britain-Israel Industrial R&D Foundation) with the UK and CIIRDF (Canada-Israel
Israel
299
Industrial R&D Foundation) with Canada. Although these funds have specific rules,
they all finance up to 50% of eligible R&D costs of joint projects proposals between
companies of both countries. The funds come from both countries, for instance
£15.5m over five years in the case of BRITECH given equally by the UK and Israeli
governments.
Beside R&D bilateral funds, Israel has R&D agreements with France, the
Netherlands, Italy, Spain, Portugal, Austria, Finland, Belgium, Ireland, India, China,
Hong Kong. Through these agreements, public authorities intend to provide
guidelines and raise awareness of international cooperation between Israeli and
foreign companies. Interestingly, joint call for proposals aimed at international
cooperative projects have been launched through these bilateral agreements. This is
for instance the case of two recent calls for applications:
•
the SIBED (Sweden Israel Testbed Program for Telecom Applications) call for
proposal with Sweden
•
the Israel Call for Proposals For Joint R&D Projects in Information and
Telecommunications Technologies with Sweden (the latter amounts to
€
10m of
R&D)
There is also a bilateral cooperation program between Israel (Ministry of Science and
Ministry of Industry and Trade ) and Germany (BMBF) aimed at financing joint RTD
projects (between academic partners since 1973 for academic partners and since 2000
for companies). Its annual budget originates from the interests on a
€
160m fund. The
board of governors of the fund is composed of an equal number of Israeli and German
partners. This framework has generated several sectoral joint call for applications:
•
MST The German-Israeli call in Microsystems Technology
•
BIO-DISC The German-Israeli call in Biotechnology
•
DICOT The German-Israeli call in Interdisciplinary Optical & Laser Technology
•
WING Cooperation projects in Materials Technology
•
German-Israeli Chemical Nanotechnology Call For Papers
These R&D agreements are implemented and managed by MATIMOP (the Israeli
Industry Center For R&D), a public non-profit organization initiated by two
manufacturers associations in Israel. This centre aims at encouraging and assisting
participation of Israeli companies (especially small ones) in international bi-lateral or
multi-lateral cooperation programs for industrial R&D. The Office of the Chief
Scientist (OCS) at the Israeli Ministry of Industry and Trade is in charge of the
decisions regarding these agreements.
The only significant initiative that was reported to us in the NNE RTD area is a
partnership between the University of Tel Aviv and Italian partners on environmental
technology RTD. This partnership that entails 6 projects is fully financed by the
Italian Ministry of Environment. One of the 6 projects aims at developing innovative
solar energy technology (integrated spherical solar collectors). This partnerships
started as a conference in 2002 (“Italian-Isreali Forum on Environmental
technologies”).
Israel
300
2.1.4
Regional versus national actors in ERA
The decision making regarding the allocation and management of NNE RTD
resources is centralized at the national level.
2.2
Concrete possible policy actions
The strong dissatisfaction with FP6 new instruments, detailed below, leaves little
room for addressing opportunities for strengthening ERA. It appears clearly that from
now on EC initiatives are looked upon with caution. FP7 will be determinant for the
future involvement of Israeli stakeholders in EC initiatives. On the other hand, this
might encourage Israeli potential partners to favour direct bilateral frameworks for
cooperating with European countries. Given the weak priority put on energy issues at
the moment, it does not appear that NNE RTD will benefit from such initiatives in the
near future. Therefore we believe that the initiative should come from foreign
partners, based on the specific comparative advantage of Israel, especially on solar
energy technologies.
According to interviewees, international cooperation is greatly needed in many
projects after the feasibility stage, when costs become too heavy for the Israeli
partners alone. It appears that Israeli partners are eager to conserve the hold on the
project, which might partly explain their will to seek international cooperation only
when key intellectual property has been secured.
2.2.1
Legal implications & suggestions
Within the frame of the 1985 law that governs the RTD policy of the Ministry of
Industry and Trade, international cooperation was hampered by several restrictions
applied to foreign companies.
The awarding of a grant from the OCS of the Ministry of Industry and Trade was
granted to three conditions that may cause problems in the case of an international
collaboration
•
the R&D project must be executed by the applicant firm itself
•
the product that result from the R&D project must be manufactured in Israel
•
the know-how acquired in the course of the R&D may not be transferred to third
parties
In 2002, the law was amended in order to include rules for transfer abroad of know-
how developed with government financial incentives. The law balances the need for
international operation with national economic interests. A company receiving a grant
can now export its technological know how if it pays a certain fee and higher royalty
returns. The new R&D law also allows for government investment in Israeli
companies operating overseas.
2.2.2
The use of new cooperative instruments of the European Union
There was consensus among interviewees, apparently reflecting a broader consensus
within the Israeli science and industry community, that the new FP6 instruments have
significantly reduced the opportunity for Israeli stakeholders to participate in EC RTD
programs. Israel is clearly facing a “transition problem” to that regard.
Israel
301
The dissatisfaction is all the greater since FP5 fitted very well Israeli partners and
raised strong enthusiasm in the industry and in universities. The rate of success and
number of participation were especially high in the IST Programme.
The critical size for participating within new FP6 instruments is believed to be too
high for allowing participation of Israeli potential partners. The latter also suffer from
a lack of relevant information, for instance regarding the identity of coordinators of
Integrated Projects under FP6. It is therefore very difficult for Israeli partners to enter
a project during the preparation phase. It was claimed that IPs are built upon existing
European networks in which Israeli partners are poorly represented. As the result the
participation of Israeli stakeholders in the projects selected in the two first calls of the
FP6 – which put the emphasis on the new instruments – is low. Most of the projects
with Israel partners are in fact follow-on of FP5 projects.
It is also significant that no Israeli partners is involved in the European PV Platform,
despite the capabilities of Israel in that area.
It is also worthwhile noticing that, during our interviews, some NNE RTD decision
makers clearly questioned the relevance of Israel’s participation to the Joint Research
Centre (JRC). The benefit for Israel does not appear obvious to these policy makers.
From a more general point of view, another trend is meaningful regarding the general
attitude of some public decision makers toward Israel involvement in EC RTD
programs: the Ministry of Finance use the funds awarded to Israeli stakeholders as a
rationale for legitimating national RTD budget cuts, especially in the NNE RTD area.
In order to secure its budget, the Ministry of National Infrastructures must sometimes
advocate that both EC-funded and Nationally funded research are complementary, not
substitutes.
3
Short background information
3.1
The overall energy situation of Israel
As regards its energy situation Israel cumulates two main challenges:
-
its initial limited energy source endowment
-
its conflictual relationships in the region
This particular situation makes Israel an “isolated island” with heavy reliance on
imports and few opportunities to develop connection and partnerships at the regional
level in order to manage and overcome this reliance.
3.1.1
Distribution of energy sources
3.1.1.1
Supply and imports
Until the recent discovery of offshore natural gas sources and, earlier, oil shales,
Israel had no fossil fuel resources on its territory. It was therefore almost entirely
dependent on import for meeting its energy needs. As a result, the distribution of
energy sources and the structure of energy imports is almost equivalent.
Israel
302
Exhibit 3-1 Import of energy sources, 2002
Source: Ministry of National Infrastructures, 2003
Energy imports has increased over 6% a year since 1990 in order to meet the
increasing demand for energy. This surge is due to the relatively high rate of
population growth (2,6% a year, which is high compared to European standards) and
the rise of the standard of living of the Israeli population.
3.1.1.2
Traditional energy sources
The two main end uses of energy supply are electricity and road transportation. Both
are rapidly increasing and affect the trend in energy imports.
Electricity accounted for 17% of energy consumption in 1980, 24% in 1998 and now
represents 27% of end use energy demand in 2002. As a result, the share of coal in
energy import, which remains the main energy source for electricity generation (80%
of the electricity generated in Israel), has rapidly grown since the 1990s. It reached
35% of the
22,5 million TOE
126
imported in 2002 (respectively 28% of 18 million in
1998).
Road transportation accounts for one third of the end-user energy consumption. The
rise of the use of transportation as measured by the average number of kilometres
travelled per annum – which has tripled since the mid-1980s – explains the increase in
oil products (especially diesel fuel) consumption. Beside diesel for transportation, the
rapid increase of naphtha consumption by industry is also noticeable.
Exhibit 3-2 Total final energy consumption, 2002
126
TOE: Tons of Oil Equivalent
Israel
303
Source: Israel National Infrastructure, 2003
Regarding electricity, the challenge Israel has to overcome is not only the growing
electricity demand per year but also the increase of peak demand (3480MW in 1991,
8750MW in 2002) which drives the capacity requirement for the country
127
. As we
were told, this is a major concern for Israel because of the use of air conditioning
appliances. It creates a major appeal for innovation in that domain. However, as the
technology that would enable storage of large capacity of electricity are still lacking,
the solutions are for the moment sought among voluntary and mandatory energy
conservation programs (lower price against individual agreement to limit the
household energy consumption during peak demand days).
Since 1997 the Government has made strong commitment toward natural gas in order to
diversify its energy sources, especially for electricity generation. The discovery of
offshore natural gas resources in the recent years has supported this strategy. The
objective is to have natural gas reaching a share of 25% of total energy supply by 2025.
3.1.1.3
Renewable energy sources
Renewable energy, which includes hydro, wind and solar power, accounts for a minor
share of energy supply, around 3% as of 2002 (2,7% in 1997 and 1998, 2,9% in
2001
128
). These 3% were almost entirely due to the solar water heaters that are placed
on the roof of 80% of Israeli families. This portion represents 21% of the electricity
used by the domestic sector and 5.2 % of national electricity consumption. Let us
remind that solar water heating equipments are mandated by law as an element of the
building codes.
127
Summer morning peak demand.
128
1997 and 1998 data originates from the MNI 2000 report (MNI, 2000). Data for 2001 originates
from IEA web site.
Israel
304
Exhibit 3-3 : Total Primary Energy Supply, 1997-1998
1997
1998
TOE
%
TOE
%
Crude oil and petroleum products
11177
65.6
11875
65.9
Coal
5466
32.1
5748
31.9
Solar and other alternative energy
sources
466
2.7
487
2.7
Natural gas
17
0.1
11
0.1
Export of electricity
-95
-0.6
-104
-0.6
Total primary energy source
17031
100
18016
100
Source : http://www.mni.gov.il
Although Israel has declared very early in its history that solar energy was of prime
importance in order to diversify its energy sources and exploit indigenous energy
sources, the share of solar energy in primary energy sources has remained low since
the 1980s, contrary to the share of oil and coal.
Exhibit 3-4 : Evolution of primary energy supply, 1980-1998
Source : http://www.mni.gov.il
The recent Electricity Generation Master Development Plan provides guideline for an
increase of the renewable energy installed capacity (100 MW of solar energy and 50
MW of wind energy with an option for an addition of 100 MW at the end of the
decade). Moreover, targets have been set by the government for electricity production
from renewable sources of 2% of total electricity consumption by 2007 and at least
5% by 2016. Despite this challenging goal, efforts to support effective take off of
renewables remains very weak.
Israel
305
3.1.2
Market concentration
The energy sector remains largely nationalized and state-regulated.
The government-owned Israeli Electric Corporation operates the electricity sector as a
monopoly (IEC supplied 99% of the nation electricity consumption).
3.2
The national RTDI system
3.2.1
Public private spending on RTD
National expenditures on civilian R&D has dramatically increased in recent years,
exceeding the increase in the GDP during the nineties. It reached 4.2% of the GDP in
2000, as opposed to 3.6% in 1999. According to the last edition of OECD R&D data,
Israeli civilian R&D expenditures as a percentage of GDP reached 4.7% in 2001.
Exhibit 3-5 : Civilian R&D expenditures as a percentage of GDP, 1995-2001
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
R&D
exp./GDP
2.6
2.7
2.8
2.9
3.2
3.6
4.2
This high level of RTD expenditures is greater than the level of most advanced
nations, and far above the 3% “Barcelona objective” .
Exhibit 3-6 : Civilian R&D expenditures as a percentage of GDP in selected
countries, 2001
Source : Israeli Ministry of Industry and Trade
As demonstrated by the 1989-2000 data, the contribution of the private sector to
civilian R&D expenditures (74,7% not including non profit organizations) is also
above the OECD average.
Israel
306
Exhibit 3-7 : Public and private R&D expenditures, 1989-2000 in NIS million
Source: Israeli Central Bureau of Statistics,, http://www.cbs.gov.il/
Note: government expenditures includes universities and the Weizmann Institute of science
The share of business R&D is rapidly growing, not only in comparison to government
expenditures, but also comparatively to other business investments. This tends to
reflect the rapid rise of the Israeli knowledge economy in the 1990s. However,
although recent figures of the respective share of public and private R&D
expenditures could not be obtained, it is likely that the share of business R&D has
been decreasing since 2000 as a result of the regional political problems and the
international crisis that hit high tech sectors, especially ICT, a sector in which Israel
private sectors had been massively investing during the last decade.
Exhibit 3-8 : Private expenditures as a percentage of gross investment in capital
formation
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
%
6.4
7.0
8.2
10.2
12.0
16.3
-
Source: Israeli Central Bureau of Statistics
3.2.2
Funding institutions
Since 1968, public support to science and technology activities in all concerned
ministries are under the responsibility of their respective Office of the Chief Scientist
(OCS). The Ministries of Agriculture, Communications, Defence, Infrastructure
(formerly Ministry of Energy), Health as well as the Ministry of Industry and Trade,
have their own intervention modes, objectives and domain of intervention to support
science and/or technology activities. Support to all RTD activities, including
industrial R&D were previously being taken care of by national R&D laboratories.
Israel
307
Exhibit 3-9 : Ministries RTD expenditures 1995-2000 (current prices NIS
Million)
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2000
/
1995
Industry and
Trade
890
985
1296
1313
1329
1648
+85.2%
Agriculture
219
213
253
254
280
289
+32%
Science, culture
and
sport
135
166
215
194
191
213
+57.8%
Energy/National
Infrastructures
92
99
93
93
81
113
+22.8%
General
University
Funds
965
1142
1356
1495
1699
1839
+90.6%
Other ministries
139
181
146
156
194
226
+62.6%
Total
2440
2786
3359
3505
3774
4328
+77.4%
Source: Israeli Central Bureau of Statistics
Reflecting the priority to industrial R&D, the Ministry of Industry and Trade appears
as the leading decision maker of the Israeli RTD policy since its creation. Its OCS
budget accounts for 66% of the overall RTD expenditure of the Israel government in
2000. This budget has increased drastically from 1990 to 1999, from $110m to
$428m. In 2000 alone, RTD expenditures rose by 24%. Of all ministries, the Ministry
of Industry and Trade has experienced the highest growth of its RTD budget from
1995 to 2000 (rise of 85%). In 1999, RTD expenditures accounted for 48% of the
ministry's overall expenditure.
Exhibit 3-10 : Share of ministries in total public RTD expenditures (not
including General University Funds), 1995-2000 (in %)
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
Ministry of Ind.
and Trade
60.3
59.9
64.7
65.3
64.0
66.2
Ministry of
Agriculture
14.8
13.0
12.6
12.6
13.5
11.6
Ministry of
Science, culture
and sport
9.2
10.1
10.7
9.7
9.2
8.6
Ministry of
Energy/National
Infrastructures
6.2
6.0
4.6
4.6
3.9
4.5
Other ministries
9.4
11.0
7.3
7.8
9.3
9.1
Total
100
100
100
100
100
100
Source : adapted from Israeli Central Bureau of Statistics
The Ministry of Industry and Trade RTD policy is governed by the “Law for the
Encouragement of Industrial R&D” that was passed in 1985 and later revised. This
law provides the Ministry with the basic principles of public support in the RTD area:
the objective is to develop science-based, export-oriented industries, which will
promote employment and improve the balance of payments.
Israel
308
The Ministry mainly intervenes through the allocation of conditional grants to
companies, financing from 20 to 50% of their R&D costs
129
. These grants are subject
to royalty payment from 3 to 5% of future product sale (up to the amount of the
grant
130
). Over 1000 projects, representing about 500 companies, are financed using
this scheme every year.
Exhibit 3-11 : Grants distributed by the Ministry of Industry and Trade in
$million, 1989-1998
Source : Teubal, 1999
Acknowledging that the Israeli industrial research capacity was too fragmented
among small companies that were not strong enough to compete internationally, the
Ministry of Industry and Trade started in 1993 providing incentives for the formation
of larger partnership involving several companies – even competing ones – and
research laboratories for a three to five year duration. Through this new scheme,
called the “Magnet” Program, up to 66% of the costs of the development of generic,
pre-competitive technologies could be financed (without any refunding required).
$60m per year are distributed through the Magnet program. Since then, the program
has evolved and now encompasses three different sub-programs in addition to the
original consortia :
•
Users’ Associations for the uptake of generic technologies and the creation of
suitable infrastructure for these technologies.
•
Magneton for the transfer of technology from the research laboratories to
industrial companies. Contrary to Magnet consortia, a one to one connection
between a laboratory and a company is eligible.
•
NUFAR in order to assist researchers to bring their research closer from industry
in the biotechnology area. The grants can represent 90% of the expenses without
any royalty payment.
Through the Ministry of Industry and Trade OCS, Israel has allocated growing funds
to the support of entrepreneurship during the 1990s. Beyond the worldwide high-tech
bubble during this period, this comprehensive support to entrepreneurship also
129
Larger percentage grants (up to 75%) are available for projects located in designated development
areas.
130
In 1999, the royalties repaid to the OCS totalled more than 139 million dollars. This indicates a
very high success rate when compared to the $300m budget.
Israel
309
specifically aimed at exploiting the technological opportunities originating from the
mass immigration of scientists and skilled workers from the former Soviet Union
since the beginning of the 1990s. The share of persons employed in high tech sectors
has dramatically increased as a result of both this inflow of scientifically trained
immigrants and the intervention of public authorities. In 1997, this share was 6.7%, to
be compared with 3.5% in the US and 3.1% in Japan and France.
It has set up special programs that are often taken as benchmarks internationally. This
is especially the case of its Technological Incubators Programme that distributes
about $30m a year to new companies. This programme is currently being privatized.
The Ministry of Industry and Trade also operates since recently a seed fund. There is
also a grant scheme designed to encourage and support individual entrepreneurs in
their initial efforts to set up a business based on a new technology. Finally, the
government owns a venture capital company, Yozma, to which it contributes up to
49% of the equity in selected projects.
The RTD budget of the Ministry of National infrastructures (formerly Ministry of
Energy) grew 22,8% during the same period, which is the lowest growth rate of all
Israeli ministries OCS budgets. In absolute terms, with NIS 213m in 2000, the
Ministry of National infrastructures ranks last of all ministries’ RTD budget. More
recently, although we do not have data for the last period, interviewees confirmed that
the Ministry experienced important cuts in its RTD budget. The number of projects
supported by the Ministry was 60 in 2000, down to 40 in 2003. In 2004, we were told
that no new call for proposal has been launched.
The funds are allocated by the Ministry of National Infrastructures through two main
types of call for applications: one for small individual projects and one for larger
multi-year programs involving several academic organizations.
4
Brief description of NNE RTD organisation
4.1
Main actors
NNE RTD is under the responsibility of the Ministry of National Infrastructures. The
policy of the Ministry is set by its OCS and implemented by its Division of Research
and Development. Its main activities consist in supporting financially energy
technologies that use indigenous energy resources. As previously claimed, the latter
are scarce, the main one being solar energy. In the 1990s, between 30 to 50% of the
total budget of the Ministry of National Infrastructures (at that time the Ministry of
Energy) were allocated to renewables ($2.96m in 1995), of which the bulk was
directed toward solar energy.
Beside the research supported by the Ministry of National Infrastructures, there is no
program dedicated to NNE RTD. However, incidentally, the Ministry of Industry and
Trade is also intervening in this area through its support schemes to industrial R&D.
As far as the OCS grant system is concerned, the resources allocated to NNE RTD are
limited. The bulk of these funds are allocated to IT related sectors in which private
sectors profit-led initiatives are much more important.
Israel
310
Regarding pre-competitive R&D, only a small amount of the resources allocated
through the MAGNET programs are supporting consortia in the NNE RTD area. In
1999, 18 Magnet consortia were supported by the Ministry, of which only one was
related to NNE RTD (“ConSolar”).
Exhibit 4-1 : Active Magnet Consortia as of December 1999
1. Ground Stations for Satellite Communications
2. Digital Wireless Communications
3. Broad-Wide Band Communication (BISDN)
4. Multimedia On-Line Services
5. Diode Pumped Lasers
6. Multi Chip Module (MCM)
7. Magnesium Technologies
8. Hybrid Seeds and Blossom Control
9. Algae Cultivation Biotechnology
10. DNA Markers
11. Drug and Kits Design and Development (“Daa’t”)
12. MMIC/GaAs components
13. 0.25 micron/300 mm devices
14. Ultra Concentrated Solar Energy (“Consolar”)
15. Network Management Systems
16. Digital Printing
17. Image Guided Therapy (“Izmel”)
18. Computerized Industrial Processes
Source : Tratjenberg, 1998
5
The NNE RTD Priority setting process
5.1
Description of the Priority setting process
The rapid increase in the scientific and technology potential of the country during the
1990s was supported by an RTD policy that was both strong and highly specific. The
specificity relates to the priority setting process, based on the “principle of neutrality”
according to which the priority is to avoid setting any priority…
As it was claimed by Manuel Trajtenberg from NBER, “
the paramount principle of
“neutrality” that has been a cornerstone of R&D Policy in Israel since the late 1960s
precludes also picking projects according to fields or any other such consideration
”.
Another renowned economist, Morris Teubal, ranks first in his list of weakness of the
Israeli RTD system “
the absence of government ‘strategic decision making’ and,
more specifically, of an explicit process designed to identify the technology policy
needs of the country
” (1998). Our interviews confirmed that these overall RTD
system level statements are also valid for the NNE RTD area.
Precisely, following the submission of a grant application, companies proposals to the
Ministry of Industry and Trade are reviewed by a Research Committee that leads the
selection process. This committee is composed of nine members: the Chief scientist
and three members from the Ministry of Industry and Trade, two from the Ministry of
Finance and three public representatives. The committee relies upon outside
professional referees and advisers to review the applications. their quality according
to criteria relating to both technological and economic potentials
Israel
311
However, with the recent budget downsizing imposed by the Ministry of Finance, the
question of the effectiveness of such a mode of intervention arose. As it is not
anymore possible to finance all the projects that satisfy the selection criteria, it was
proposed to set priorities and select the best projects within these areas. However, no
deviations from the technological neutrality principle has been reported during our
interviews or in the literature. According to M. Teubal, budget cuts has not led to
‘sector/technology selectivity’ but rather to differences in incentives between large
and small firms and a tighter selection.
Although neutrality in incentives still prevails, it is to be noticed that biotechnology
and IT sectors have been awarded specific support schemes. For instance, in 2000, the
Israeli government launched a program to place biotechnology on the national agenda
and a national strategy for the biotechnology sector was elaborated. Nanotechnologies
also benefited from the so-called Israel National Nanotechnology Initiative. It has
been proposed that a portion of the large funds that originates from the Jewish
community, mainly in North America, could be directed toward RTD in prioritized
activities such as the creation of a nanotechnology research centre
131
. IT-related RTD
is also offered a special treatment given the Israeli capabilities in this sector.
According to figures originating from the Israel Association of Electronics &
Information Industries, the share of IT and electronics industry in the OCS budget has
grown from 19.4 to 56.1% from 1995 to 2000. However, this might be more the
ex
post
result of the growth of this sector than the reflect of a national strategy.
Although the principle of neutrality governs the allocation of resources to RTD, NNE
RTD might benefit from a better position than other sectors given the existence of a
Ministry of National Infrastructures whose in charge of NNE RTD. However as
mentioned earlier, the Ministry can only direct few resources toward NNE RTD. As
regard the structuring of the priority setting process, the Ministry consults since the
end of 1990s an advising committee mainly composed of university researchers for
strategic decisions such as the priority given through the Ministry’s call for
applications.
The Interdisciplinary Center for Technological Analysis and Forecasting (ICTAF) at
Tel-Aviv University is providing information and analyses into the NNE RTD
priority setting process. An example of such contribution to decision making in NNE
RTD is the Delphi study foresight study for energy technologies that was recently
conducted by ICTAF. A senior researcher at ICTAF, who is also the former Chief
Scientist of the Ministry of National Infrastructures, participated in this foresight
initiative.
131
As of today the bulk of these donations goes towards social welfare for the Jewish community in
Israel or in the US.
Israel
312
Exhibit 5-1 : Results of the Israeli Delphi foresight study for energy technologies
Topics that are rated
most highly by degree
of importance (value)
-
Low cost, efficient photovoltaics
-
Widespread use of renewables
-
Water decomposition with sunlight (presumably for hydrogen
production)
-
Aqueous biomass production and biotreatment of wastes
-
Carbon dioxide fixation from fossil fuel combustion
-
Electric vehicles, including both fuel cells and much improved batteries
-
High temperature superconductive materials
-
Improved building energy efficiency
-
More efficient vehicles using internal combustion engines
Topics that are rated
most highly by degree
of business
advantages
-
Renewable energy systems (presumably reflecting Israeli companies
active in solar thermal, geothermal, and waste heat recovery)
-
Efficient photovoltaics
-
Water decomposition with sunlight
-
Biomass via aquaculture
-
Technology for reduced truck emissions
-
Efficient batteries
Source : Spiewak I, Einav A., Sharan Y., 2004.
5.2
Current NNE RTD priorities relevant for ERA in NNE RTD
5.2.1
The Energy Master Plan recommendations
The Ministry of National Infrastructures has commissioned independent energy
experts to provide recommendations for an Israeli energy strategy, namely the Energy
Master Plan. This plan has just been released.
The main recommendations are:
•
The promotion of energy efficiency and conservation
•
Greater focus upon renewable energy, especially solar energy
•
The promotion of natural gas penetration
•
Reforms of the energy sector (privatization of energy companies)
5.2.2
Overall priorities of Israeli public authorities
The low priority given to energy RTD as a whole is obvious from the figures of the
allocation of public financing by objectives.
Israel
313
Exhibit 5-2 : Israel public financing by Objectives, 1999 (in %)
1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000
Development of agriculture, forestry and
fishing
10.4 9.3 9.8 8.4 8.2 8.0 8.1 7.3
Promotion of industrial development
technology
36.7 36.4 36.5 35.4 38.6 37.5 35.2 38.1
Production and use of energy
1.5 1.4 2.1 2.3 1.6 1.3 0.9 1.4
Development of infrastructure
2.0 1.9 0.9 1.0 0.5 0.6 0.6 0.5
Control and care of the environment
0.0 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2
Health
0.5 0.5 0.4 0.5 0.4 0.5 0.4 0.5
Social development and services
4.7 5.0 4.2 4.6 3.3 3.4 4.2 4.1
Exploration and exploitation of the earth
and atmosphere
1.1 1.3 0.8 0.5 0.4 0.5 0.4 0.5
General advancement of knowledge
43.0 44.2 45.0 46.8 46.7 48.0 50.0 47.3
Civil space
0.1 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1
100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
Source : adapted from Israeli Central Bureau of Statistics
Compared to other countries, it appears clearly that energy is not a priority in Israel
(0,9% of public financing as compared to 5,1 in France and 19,2 in Japan). Is also far
below the OECD average (5,2%).
Exhibit 5-3 : Israel and selected OECD countries public financing by objectives,
1999 (in %)
Adv of
knowl.
Social
dev
and
services
Health Environ
Infras-
tructure
Energy
Indus
dev
Agric Other Total
Israel
50.0
4.2
0.4
0.1
0.6
0.9
35.2
8.1
0.5
100
OECD
average
45.8
3.8
6.2
2.7
2.3
5.2
10.5
6.9
16.6
100
Germany
54.8
2.5
3.2
3.5
1.7
3.6
12.2
2.7
15.8
100
United
Kingdom
29.7
2.2
14.5
2.3
1.7
0.6
0.9
4.3
43.8
100
France
37.5
1.2
5.5
2.2
0.6
5.1
5.7
3.8
38.4
100
Japan
49.5
0.9
3.7
0.7
3.1
19.2
7.1
3.5
12.3
100
United
States
6.2
1.0
19.8
0.9
2.6
1.9
0.6
2.4
64.6
100
Canada
10.3
4.5
11.7
4.0
5.2
7.0
16.3
14.4
26.6
100
Source : OECD figures for all countries except Israel, Israeli Central Bureau of Statistics
Note: Defense RTD was not provided for Israel. For all other countries, we included defense
RTD expenditures in the category “Other”.
5.2.3
The NNE RTD priorities of the Ministry of National Infrastructures
Since the Ministry of Energy became the Ministry of National Infrastructures, its
priorities go beyond NNE RTD and also include topics related to water, earth science
and mining for instance. It is important to keep in mind that only 10% of the Ministry
of National Infrastructures’ RTD budget is traditionally dedicated to energy RTD.
The bulk of the Ministry’s RTD budget goes to geological research. Energy RTD at
the Ministry of National Infrastructures accounted for NIS8.5m in 2003 and was
Israel
314
reduced by half in 2004 to NIS4.33m. As a result, the share of NNE RTD in the total
budget of the Ministry went down to 6,5% (cf. Exhibit 5-4).
Exhibit 5-4 : Allocation of the RTD budget of the Ministry of National
Infrastructures, 2002-2004
2002
2003
2004
in million
NIS
%
in million
NIS
%
in million
NIS
%
NNE RTD
7.76
10.62
8.65
10.87
4.33
6.51
Other
RTD*
65.30
89.38
70.90
89.13
62.20
93.49
Total
73.06
100
79.55
100
66.53
100
* Geology, geophysics, sea and lakes
As of 2003, the overall official priorities of the Ministry were the following (Ministry
of National Infrastructures, 2003):
•
R&D of technologies for the exploitation of indigenous alternative energy
resources and for a more efficient utilization of conventional ones;
•
R&D in the areas of water production and consumption;
•
Maintaining a knowledge base in areas of activity in which the Ministry is
involved, that will enable the absorption and utilization of modern technologies
(either imported or locally developed).
Regarding NNE RTD topics, the activities supported by the Ministry are increasingly
focused on solar energy as a result of its comparative advantage in this domain but
also because of choices caused by severe cuts in its OCS budget. The solar/thermal
technologies upon which the popular solar water heating equipments are based were
developed during the 1950s. There are only few opportunities for improvements of
these distributed technologies.
Strong emphasis is put on concentrated solar thermal and, to a lesser extent, to
photovoltaics. The Ben Gurion Solar Energy Research Center (Ben Gurion University
of the Neguev) has carried-out an 8-year solar radiation survey of the Neguev desert
(including development of sun-tracking measuring instruments) and is also working
on reducing cost of cells for concentrated photovoltaic power system. It is also used
as a demonstration facility for various solar-thermal and photovoltaic technologies.
The activities of the Weizmann Institute of Science on highly-concentrated solar
energy technologies have been supported by the Ministry of National Infrastructures
for over a decade. Especially, the large projects of the solar tower complex has now
reached a commercial phase and is therefore now supported by the Ministry of
Industry and Trade (ConSolar consortium, see
infra
) in order to associate companies
in the project. WIS research projects also include development of advanced
technologies for high-temperature heat and electricity generation, gasification of
biomass, storage and transport of energy and development of a solar-powered laser.
Oil Shales, the only fossil fuel energy resource of Israel with natural gas, have
attracted in the past about half of the Ministry’s OCS budget, through the financing of
PAMA a company established by the government and large Israeli companies (IEC,
Israel Chemicals and Oil Refineries). However, the Ministry has put an end to its
Israel
315
support to these activities after the construction of a pilot plant because of the high
fuel extraction costs.
Finally, the Ministry is also allocating some resources to the development of efficient
technologies for buildings.
5.2.4
The NNE RTD priorities of the Ministry of Industry and Trade
As we said before, the Ministry of Industry and Trade does not prioritize areas as
most of its financial contribution to RTD projects is allocated according to a strictly
bottom-up grants system. Projects are judged one by one without any attempt to rank
or establish priorities among the proposals. As a result, the distribution of funds
among the various areas reflects the
ex post
structure of the industrial structure, not
the
ex ante
priorities of public authorities.
Exhibit 5-5 : OCS grants by sector in 2000 and 2001
Source:: Israeli Ministry of Industry and Trade
Although MAGNET programs financing are also distributed based on initial
proposals from science-industry partnerships, it is the closest Israeli technology
policy can get from strategic support. “ConSolar Ltd.” (Concentrated Sunlight
Consortium) is one of the very few consortia related to NNE RTD. This consortium
that gathered together four industry companies and three research companies. It aimed
at developing and commercializing applicable concentrated solar energy technologies.
It was established in July 1995 and ended its activities, at least within the Magnet
Program, at the end of 2000. Four different projects originating from former Ministry
of National Infrastructures-sponsored activities at the Weizmann Institute of Science
were hosted and financed through this umbrella.
Israel
316
Exhibit 5-6 : Description of the projects within the ConSolar Ltd consortium
Project content
Partners
Beam- Down Reflective Tower concept, intended for utilizing
multi-megawatt Central Solar Power Plants
ORMAT Industries, ROTEM
Industries, WIS (+BOEING)
Small (<100 kWe), solar facilities intended primarily for off-grid
applications, based on concentrator photovoltaic facilities
MLM Division of the Israel
Aircraft Industry and Tel-Aviv
University
Solar thermal energy driven facilities, involving "small" Solar
Tower and Dish Concentrator options and a Solar Energy driven
Gas Turbine Generator. Technology intended for off-grid
applications using fuel for hybrid operations
EDIG Industry, ROTEM and
WIS
Solar-pumped laser technological development for communication,
energy transmission and for industrial photochemical applications
ROTEM Industries and Ben-
Gurion University
Source: adapted from http://magnet.consortia.org.il
Note : WIS: Weizmann Institute of Science
During our interviews with NNE RDT public decision makers it was clearly claimed
that, beyond the principle of neutrality, NNE RTD ranked poorly in the agenda of
politicians in Israel. Despite the regional position of the country and the strategic
importance of NNE technologies, strong initiatives and momentum are still lacking at
the top level of political decision making. For most Israeli politicians, NNE RTD is
considered as a luxury that the country cannot afford since NNE technologies are still
loosely related to short to mid term tangible results in terms of competitiveness and
growth. Long term environment and strategic issues are only loosely included in the
political process, providing poor incentives for a focus on NNE RTD in the Ministries
that have strong influence resource allocation, the Ministry of Finance and that of
Industry and Trade.
The fact that a “Commissioner for the Coming Generation” was nominated at the
Knesset might be a sign that long term issues, including environment and energy
related issues, will be more weighted in the political process in the future. This person
was said to put strong emphasis on NNE technologies, especially solar energy, which
might benefit from favourable regulations and subsidies in the future.
Israel
317
Annexe A
Bibliography
IMD, 2004, World Competitiveness Yearbook 2004. IMD, Lausanne.
Ministry of National Infrastructures, 2003,
Israel National Infrastructure, Policies,
Activities, Data
, Israel Government Publication Office.
Ministry of National Infrastructures, 2000,
Israel National Infrastructure, Policies,
Activities, Data
, Israel Government Publication Office.
Spiewak I, Einav A., Sharan Y., 2004, Energy Forcasting study, Report No.: E/131,
Interdisciplinary Center for Technology Analysis and Forecasting, January.
Teubal M., 1998, Towards an R&D strategy for Israel, Draft IFISE Publication,
Israeli Financing Innovation Scheme for Europe, http://ifise.unipv.it/
Trajtenberg M., 2000, R&D Policy in Israel: An Overview and Reassessment, NBER
Working Paper, No. 7930, October.
Italy
319
Country study Italy
Italy
321
Contents:
1
Summary of country study indicating main points for synergy
323
2
Main points for collaboration, synergy, complementarity with regard to the
NNE RTD ERA
323
2.1
Necessary conditions for making ERA happen
323
2.2
Existing opportunities for ERA
324
2.3
Concrete possible policy actions
325
2.3.1
Relations with other energy-related themes
325
2.3.2
Involving companies
325
3
Short background information
325
3.1
The overall energy situation of Italy
325
3.1.1
Distribution of energy sources
325
3.1.2
Imports/exports
326
3.1.3
Market concentration
326
3.2
The national RTDI system
327
3.2.1
Public/private spending on RTD
327
3.2.2
Main public research
327
3.2.3
Funding institutions
327
4
Brief description of NNE RTD organisation
328
4.1
Funding Ministries
329
4.1.1
Ministry of Education, University and Research (MIUR)
329
4.1.2
Ministry of Productive Activities (MAP)
329
4.1.3
Ministry for Environment and Territories
330
4.2
ENEA
330
4.3
Other public organisations
332
4.4
Industrial sector
332
5
Current NNE RTD priorities relevant for ERA in NNE RTD
334
6
Description of Priority setting process
336
Italy
323
1
Summary of country study indicating main points for
synergy
Italy is well-embedded in European research. It is however concentrating its European
research and technical development (RTD) collaborations, especially as concerns
NNE, with Spain, France and Greece, and, for some projects, Germany. The main
difficulty is the lack of national funding allowing ENEA, the Italian main actor in
public non nuclear energy (NNE) RTD, and other research organisations, to
participate to EU projects, and allowing researchers to move to other European and
European countries’ research centres.
According to IEA, the International Energy Agency, the Italian government invested
190M
€
in NNE RTD in 2002. It has to be noted that even if the nuclear programme
was stopped in 1987, nuclear energy RTD still represents more than one third of the
total energy RTD budget of the government.
Regarding NNE RTD, Italy is focusing on long-term research (especially in hydrogen
and thermodynamic solar energy) and high-resources research projects. Interviewees
expressed the view that future European projects and programmes shall better balance
between mid-long term projects and short term RTD. Renewables in particular has
been benefiting of substantial added funding since 2001. However the priority setting
process remains at the “collegial discussion” level, and there no such thing as a fixed
budgetary planning, which would ensure a continuity in RTD activities.
2
Main points for collaboration, synergy, complementarity
with regard to the NNE RTD ERA
2.1
Necessary conditions for making ERA happen
Even if well-embedded in European RTD collaborations,
132
Italian participation is
hampered by the relative weakness of and uncertainties in national funding.
Research organisations can not rely on fixed annual or pluri-annual budgetary
planning (see in particular section 6); moreover the Italian State general amount of
funding for energy RTD has been decreasing in the past decades (see chapter 4).
A similar financial problem occurs in mobility issues. Mobility of researchers seems
to be an Italian preoccupation, and researchers should be able to work where relevant
RTD activities are carried out independent of the country. ENEA researchers are
participating to EU research centres, for example the Joint Research Centre (part of
which happens to be located in Italy), but they are less and less able to do so for
financial reasons. Mobility of Italian researchers in other European Member States’
institutes is also very weak for that reason.
Apart from this – quite crucial – financial issue, Italian researchers do not seem to
encounter specific structural barriers to collaborate at the European level. Two issues
132
According to the frequent quotation of Italy by foreign interview partners. See also the CORDIS
web site for more precise information on Italian participation in European projects.
Italy
324
related to information were nevertheless highlighted on communication and on
dissemination of data and project results by interviewees:
•
It was felt that dissemination of research results deserves more attention; for
example there could be an obligation to exchange RTD data or to make them
available more widely
•
Concerning information on results, communication actions should be organised,
for example special events around some key results. Italy, at a national level,
would lack activities concerning communication and co-ordination of research
results; this could be organised, as it was suggested, through a national conference
at the end of each Framework Programme.
There was also a concern for a more balanced European intervention between mid or
long-term oriented research vs short-term RTD. According to the representative of
ENEA we spoke to long-term issues would have been neglected by European projects
in the last 10 years, and our interviewees assessed that research should be more
oriented towards mid-term and long-term projects, that should mainly involve public
research actors. At the same time, according to them, the transfer of results to society,
to market, should be better improved, as European projects are presently not
concerning technologies close to the commercial stage. This means also to boost the
industry participation in short-term projects.
2.2
Existing opportunities for ERA
For
geographical reasons
, Italy is mostly working with Mediterranean countries:
France, Spain and Greece, but also with North-African and Middle-East countries.
The latter collaborations were especially developed because of EU funding
opportunities (programmes focusing on Mediterranean area). Now that EU
programmes are more oriented towards Central and Eastern Europe Countries, Italian
collaborations are, in a way, following the funds.
133
Other collaborations are due to the recognised
thematic competencies
of partner
countries (for example Germany in photovoltaic, or Denmark in wind energy).
This reason is also strongly linked to the identification of themes internationally
perceived as important, like for example fuel cells, whose related European projects
are involving many Italian teams.
From an
extra-European
point of view, Italy contributes to many partnerships in 20
IEA Implementing Agreements.
In the area of energy, Italy also has 3 bilateral agreements with the US relating,
respectively, to
•
Climate change technologies (Ministry of Environment)
•
Clean energy technologies (Ministry of Industry)
•
Carbon sequestration since June 2003 (Ministry of Industry): Italy takes part in
the Carbon Sequestration Leadership Forum, an American initiative involving 13
countries and the European Union
133
For ENEA, the National Agency for New Technology, Energy and Environment, this concerns
however more expertise and support activities than RTD.
Italy
325
ENEA also collaborates with China to promote the national energy industry since the
1980’s, but this seems to depend much on personal contacts.
2.3
Concrete possible policy actions
2.3.1
Relations with other energy-related themes
The interviewees were especially concerned with two related themes: environment
(and climate change) and socio-economic research, and a third one.
Energy must be related to climate change RTD, according to ENEA: energy and
environment matters are quite the same, because energy RTD shall reduce
environmental impacts. There is a link with transport for the same reason. That is
why a clear action of the European Commission towards Kyoto Protocol
requirements, i.e. to focus on RTD activities reducing CO2 emissions, is needed.
The necessity of linking energy RTD to social cost and welfare research was also
emphasised by different interviewees and hence the issue of externalities. In order to
reduce the social cost of energy production, RTD shall aim at identifying and
quantifying instruments to take these costs into account for the evaluation of the cost
per KWh. In this regard, Italy is already involved at the European level in projects
such as ExternE and NEEDS (New Energy Externalities Development for
Sustainability).
A third issue that came to the fore was how new technologies can contribute to
energy savings. Technologies that are not traditional energy technologies per se,
such as biotechnologies, nanotechnologies and new materials, should be investigated
in this regard.
2.3.2
Involving companies
It was also suggested that the Commission could take a more active role in
encouraging risk-capital and venture-capital in order to involve companies in projects.
Other suggestions would be tax credits in order to involve industry in short-term RTD
projects. The latter of course would be a national not a European issue.
3
Short background information
Italy is a founding Member State of the European Union.
The Italian population counted 57.3 million in 2001. Italy’s geographical surface is
301 300 km2. Italy’s gross domestic product (GDP) grew by an estimated 0,4%
between 2001 and 2002.
3.1
The overall energy situation of Italy
3.1.1
Distribution of energy sources
Almost all of Italy’s energy supply is derived from fossil fuels. Oil still represents the
largest share, but is gradually decreasing. The share of gas has been increasing since
1990 (it represented then 25,6% of TPES). Combustible renewables and wastes,
Italy
326
including geothermal, solar and wind are increasing (3,2% in 2000 against 2,5% in
1990
134
) though remaining small, and hydraulics share remains stable since 1990.
Exhibit 3-1 Energy share of total primary energy supply in 2000
Source : www.iea.org
3.1.2
Imports/exports
Italy is a minor producer of oil and gas. The Ministry of Productive Activities
states
135
that the Italian energy system is strongly dependent on oil and gas imports
(about 84%) and imports about 99% of its coal requirements ; this dependence is of
82% in the power generation sector. This represents a significant concern in terms of
security of primary energy supply.
The diversification of energy sources is an important policy priority in Italy owing to
this high dependence on oil and gas imports. It has to be noted however that Italy
ruled out the nuclear option in a 1987 moratorium that is still valid today.
The government expects to achieve diversification through the promotion of
renewable energy and an increased role of coal in power generation (use of clean coal
technologies).
3.1.3
Market concentration
Large state-owned companies, including ENI (the oil and natural gas company) and
ENEL (the Italian electricity company), have started to be privatised. The energy
market has been opened in respect of EU directives. However, in practice, the gas
market is still dominated by ENI and barriers exist for new entrants. The electricity
market should be fully liberalised in 2007.
134
IEA, Italy 2003 review.
135
Ministry of Productive Activities, Report on national fossil fuels RD&D programmes, June
2003.
Italy
327
3.2
The national RTDI system
3.2.1
Public/private spending on RTD
In 2000, public and private gross expenditure were of
€
15 billion for overall R&D,
representing 1,1% of Italian GDP. The government funded almost half of the total
R&D expenditure.
136
Exhibit 3-2 R&D expenditure per execution sector, in M
€
1980
1990
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
Public
administration
613
3 660
4 627
4 901
5 606
6 156
6 291
6 544
Firms
883
5 120
5 762
6 217
6 389
6 657
6 746
7 380
Total
1 496
8 780
10 389
11 117
11 995
12 813
13 037
13 924
ISTAT
Exhibit 3-3 R&D expenditure in 2000 per funding origin
Public
administration
Firms
Foreign country
Total
%
50,8
43,0
6,2
100
OECD
3.2.2
Main public research
The private sector is executing near the half of the Italian RTD. Public research is
mainly performed by universities.
Exhibit 3-4 R&D expenditure in 2000 per executive sector
State
University
Firms
Total
%
19,2
31,5
49,5
100
OECD
Universities and public research organisations are funded by ministries and budgets
are decided annually, by law. Some public research organisations have external
resources, mainly the National Centre for Research, CNR, and ENEA, the National
Agency for New Technology, Energy and Environment.
3.2.3
Funding institutions
The Ministries are directly funding research. The allocation of financing to research
by the government and the parliament is following the strategic priorities defined in
the annual DPEF (Economic and Financial Programmatic Document). General
objectives and realisation modalities of financial interventions are established in that
document, mainly by the Ministry in charge of research with the approval of the
InterMinisterial Committee for Economic Planning (CIPE).
On the DPEF basis is the triennial PNR (National Research Programme) made up by
the Ministry in charge of Research, with the approval of CIPE. It is the main tool for
136
IEA Italy 2003 review.
Italy
328
identifying trends, strategic priorities and financial resources for scientific and
technological research. The 2003-2006 PNR define 8 RTD macro areas to focus on
•
Production system
•
Information and communication
•
Energy
•
Environment
•
Transports
•
Agro-food
•
Health
•
Cultural goods
Also, PNR’s guidelines identify 4 strategic lines
•
Advancing of the knowledge frontier
•
Supporting research for the development of key multisectorial enabling
technologies
•
Strengthening of industrial research and technological development activities
•
Promoting SME’s capacity in innovating products and processes
4
Brief description of NNE RTD organisation
According to the IEA Italian 2003 review, “energy R&D accounts for only a few
percentage points of public R&D spending, and less than 5% of total R&D spending.
Public funding for energy R&D was about 263M
€
in 2000 and 283M
€
in 2001.
Public energy R&D investment has dropped significantly since the late 1980’s from a
peak at 1MM
€
in 1985 (in 2001
€
).”
NNE RTD represented 190M
€
of government funding in 2002.
Exhibit 4-1 Total Government energy RTD and NNE RTD budgets, in M
€
, in
2002 prices
137
137
1992 and 1999 : data not available.
Italy
329
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002
TOTAL ENERGY R&D
TOTAL NNE R&D
Source : IEA
The main actors are the 3 funding Ministries (Research, Environment, Industry) and
ENEA, the National Agency for New Technology, Energy and Environment, which
is leading RTD activities in the energy field. Also, CESI, an ENEL subsidiary that is
leading research on electricity systems, CNR (National Research Council), some
universities, some regions and local research institutes play a role in NNE RTD.
4.1
Funding Ministries
4.1.1
Ministry of Education, University and Research (MIUR)
The MIUR prepares the annual PNR (National Research Plan), and this Plan is the
basis for its funding policy. We have just seen that energy was one of the macro
areas the PNR focused on; the support to 12 specific enabling technologies is the
basis of the MIUR’s action. Each of these technologies is matched with each macro
area. Energy is thus put in relation to micro and nanotechnologies, structural and
functional materials technologies, chemical technologies and electrochemistry, fluid
dynamics and combustion technologies, electronics, robotics and advanced planning
systems, as well as advanced informatics.
MIUR is mainly funding RTD activities through calls for proposal.
138
4.1.2
Ministry of Productive Activities (MAP)
The General Direction of energy and mineral resources is in charge of energy
policies. The Ministry funds few energy RTD; its only energy-related RTD fund
is the Public Fund for Electricity System, which represents 85M
€
per year, allocated
through calls for proposal.
138
Because of the focus on enabling technologies serving different thematic areas at a time,
information on the total budget allocated to NNE RTD or to energy RTD was not available.
Italy
330
4.1.3
Ministry for Environment and Territories
139
The Ministry is funding energy RTD related to environmental concerns.
4.2
ENEA
The National Agency for New Technology, Energy and Environment is responsible
for research, development and dissemination of technology and for covering energy
efficiency, renewables and environmental technologies. ENEA is a public institution
supervised by the Ministry of Industry, the Ministry for the Environment and the
Ministry of Education, University and Research. ENEA designs R&D programmes
and implements projects. The agency works closely with both large and small
enterprises to transfer and disseminate relevant technologies. It also provides
scientific and technological consulting and support services to national and regional
administrations for their planning and implementing of energy and environmental
measures.
ENEA’s 2001-2003 Three-year Plan
140
“sets out the tasks for the period 2001-2003,
meeting the need to focus on well-defined targets in order to streamline all activities
and optimise all available financial and human resources, as well as equipment and
expertise.”
The Plan envisages seven aims and 21 objectives that define ENEA’s mission
(Exhibit 4-2).
139
It has not been possible to organise an interview with a representative of the Ministry, nor in face
to face nor in telephone.
140
www.enea.it
Italy
331
Exhibit 4-2 ENEA Three-year Plan 2001-2003: overview
Aims
Objectives
Energy for the
future
•
New fuels
•
Renewable and clean energies
•
Higher energy efficiency
Protection of the
Planet
•
Development of environmentally-friendly products and
processes
•
Waste cycle, water treatment, CO
2
capture
•
Radioactive waste disposal and radiation protection
Protection of
Mankind
•
Health protection
•
Safe food, safe environment
•
Sustainable cities and safe transportation
Large-scale
advanced
techniques
•
Plasma fusion and physics
•
Particle accelerators
•
High-performance modelling and computing
New technologies
for competitiveness
•
New materials
•
Innovative industrial technologies
•
Plants and animals, agro-biotechnologies and the food-
processing industry
Global changes
•
Climate and oceanographic models
•
The Mediterranean habitat
•
Technologies for analysing and responding to change
Services for the
Country
•
Adviser
•
Assistance to local public administrations and to small and
medium-sized enterprises
•
Technology transfer to public services
According to IEA, “the objective is to facilitate the development of frontier energy
technology enabling a possible future shift away from fossil fuels.”
The ‘agency activity’ of ENEA (expertise, technical support to companies and public
administrations on both central and local level) is substantial, although it has not
been possible to obtain information on the budgets devoted to each Aim described in
the table above.
The funding of ENEA by the Ministries is the following:
•
The main funding source is the Ministry of Productive Activities (for 50%), but
this is mostly concerning management costs (salaries, infrastructures…) and
programme agreements on specific topics (for example renewables and energy
saving) concerning however only agency’s activities like expertise, technical
support… The Ministry’s overall funding is of circa 250 M
€
according to our
interlocutor at MAP
•
The Ministry of Environment funds ENEA only for specific tasks, specially
needed by the Ministry. The agency does not have the possibility to change these
tasks
Italy
332
•
The MIUR’s funding comes from successful tenders from ENEA to the
Ministry’s calls
ENEA co-operates with the national industry for its RTD activities, especially with
ENEL (mainly on high temperature component). New regulations authorises ENEA
researchers to work in private companies, on companies’ demand, for a limited
period of time. Their salaries are still paid by the Agency.
4.3
Other public organisations
CNR
is leading some NNE RTD, for example with one of its research institutes the
Institute for advanced energy technologies “Nicola Giordano.” The
Institute of
Geophysics
and Volcanology
has RTD activity on carbon sequestration. But most of
the NNE RTD remains in ENEA.
Universities
The MIUR is mainly working with the universities through calls for proposal.
The Regions
play some role in RTD, however the process of decentralisation is not
yet completed. Their role in the energy policy is recognised though by the Italian
Constitution (the establishment of the general principles lies with the Government,
while the detailed definition of the provisions is care of the Regional
Administrations). Concerning energy RTD things are not fixed yet: some regions
have officially adopted the Energy-Environment Programs of the Regional
Administrations (PEAR), in which the role of technological innovation is considered
as fundamental.
141
Regions can submit proposals to the ministries to get funding, with the local research
institutions. Northern regions (Milan, Trieste, Trento… ) are the most involved in
RTD tenders.
4.4
Industrial sector
The Italian industrial sector has reduced its energy RTD investments in the past years.
This evolution is mainly the consequence of the privatisation of ENEL and ENI (see
chapter 3.1.3), who are the main private bodies in NNE RTD.
It is to be noted that, according to our interviewee at the Ministry of Research, the
private sector is only investing, in the energy field, for circa 80% in oil and gas and
for circa 20% in electricity.
ENI, the Italian Oil and Natural Gas Company
ENI conducts RTD activities mainly through EniTechnologie SpA, which is
responsible for corporate R&D. In 2002, 1 390 employees were involved in RTD
activities.
141
To know more about the actual state in the definition of PEARs region by region, see ENEA,
Energy and Environment Report 2002, vol.1 Analysis, p.359 (in Italian).
Italy
333
Exhibit 4-3 ENI’s RTD expenses in M
€
2000
2001
2002
Amount
234
203
175
Source : ENI report 2002
Exhibit 4-4 ENI’s major research areas in 2002
Axis
Research areas
Reduction of exploration and
development costs
•
Geosciences
•
High resolution prospecting techniques
•
Field simulation models
•
Field productivity enhancement methods
•
Advanced drilling system
•
Production in hostile environments
Performance and product
differentiation
•
Advanced process control
•
Innovative polymerisation catalysis
Feedstocks enhancement
•
Long distance gaslines
•
Conversion of gas into liquid products
•
Conversion of heavy crudes into light
products
Environmental protection
•
Hydrogen
•
New formulas for fuels and lubricants
•
“Clean” catalytic processes
•
Air quality monitoring
•
Reclaiming of polluted soils
Source : ENI report 2002
According to the IEA Italian 2003 review, in 2001, “RTD relating to exploration and
production, natural gas and refining and marketing activities as well as strategic
research accounted for 52% of ENI’s total R&D expenditures, while 34% was
attributed to petrochemical activities. The remaining 13% was attributed to oilfield
services and engineering activities.”
ENEL, the Italian Electricity Company
, has substantially reduced its RTD
investments, letting its subsidiary CESI (see below) to conduct RTD activities on
electricity. According to ENEL’s 2002 annual report:
“The objective of our research and development activity is to improve the efficiency
and capacity, and innovate and expand the service offering, of our core energy
businesses, as well as to educe their environmental impact. (…)
During the past three years, we have conducted research and development activities
mainly to improve the efficiency of our generation plants and our transmission and
distribution networks, to minimise the environmental impact of electricity
generation, and to develop innovative technologies so as to deliver new services
through our network infrastructure. We conduct our research and development
activities mainly through Enel Produzione, Enel.Hydro and Enel Green Power. We
also conduct research and development activities through CESI SpA, which was one
of our consolidated subsidiaries until 2002 (…)
Italy
334
Research and development programs involved about 1 000 of our employees in 2002.
Our expenditures on research and development were approximately 100 M
€
for
2002, 100M
€
for 2001 and 124M
€
for 2000.”
CESI
is a research company owned by ENEL. It spends more than 250 M
€
for RTD
on the electricity system. It is funded by a fee on electricity collected from the
consumer. CESI is also the main beneficiary of the Ministry of Productive Activities’
Fund for Electricity Systems.
RTD activities carried out by CESI include
•
Relating to electricity :
−
electrical power conversion
−
electricity system evolution
−
interaction between the electricity system and the environment
•
relating to renewables :
−
wind energy mapping
−
parabolic dish for solar concentration
−
photovoltaic cells
CESI has few international collaborations, mainly because an Intellectual Property
Agreement with MAP does not allow it to share its RTD results.
5
Current NNE RTD priorities relevant for ERA in NNE RTD
Italy has chosen to focus its NNE RTD on mid-long-term activities, and especially on
hydrogen and high temperature solar energy. The following figure shows indeed that
renewables and power and storage technologies correspond to the larger shares of the
budget NNE RTD government in 2002.
Italy
335
Exhibit 5-1 Government NNE RTD budget, 2002
M
€
%
Total conservation
25,0
13
Industry
10,0
5
Residential Commercial
15,0
8
Transportation
0,0
0
Other Conservation
0,0
0
Total fossil fuels
0,0
0
Total renewable energy
52,0
27
Total Solar
49,5
26
Solar Heating & Cooling
4,0
2
Solar Photo-Electric
10,0
5
Solar Thermal-Electric
35,5
19
Wind
0,5
0
Ocean
0,0
0
Biomass
2,0
1
Geothermal
0,0
0
Total Hydro
0,0
0
Large Hydro (>10 MW)
0,0
0
Small Hydro (<10 MW)
0,0
0
Total power & storage tech.
78,2
41
Electric Power Conversion
30,0
16
Electricity Transm. & Distr.
36,0
19
Energy Storage
12,2
6
Total other tech./research
35,0
18
Energy Systems Analysis
0,0
0
Other Tech. or Research
35,0
18
TOTAL NNE R&D
190,2
100
Source : IEA
Hydrogen
Italy has chosen hydrogen because of an international technology watch, using the EU
“Hydrogen and fuel cells road map”, but also because of a co-operation with the
American Department of Energy (DoE).
Hydrogen RTD is related to solar energy RTD (see below), to nanotechnologies RTD
and to activities in CO2 sequestration (research on production of hydrogen from fossil
fuels).
The inter-ministerial decree of 17 December 2002 allocated 51M
€
to research on
hydrogen. The same decree allocated 39M
€
to research on fuel cells; it has to be
noted that this is more a short-time oriented research (for stationary and transport
applications).
High temperature solar energy
This RTD is the main priority of ENEA, whose programme focus on 2 main potential
applications:
•
The generation and storage of medium temperature (550°) heat for the electric
power generation
Italy
336
•
The generation and storage of high temperature heat (superior to 850°) for the
generation of hydrogen
ENEA has been given through the Finance Act 2001 a contribution of around 103 M
€
over the 3 years period of the programme
142
, to be provided on the basis of prescribed
progress targets in research, experimentation, design and implementation of the
project, and profitability of programme management.
ENEA has chosen to concentrate its RTD efforts on long-term-oriented high
temperature solar energy for 3 main reasons
•
The belief that short-term RTD will not change dramatically the Italian situation
(high energy dependency, etc.), even in activities like energy efficiency for
example
•
The solar potential of Italy
•
The fact that the level of funding in Italy is very low, even more in energy
research, making choices necessary
6
Description of Priority setting process
There is no clear priority setting process regarding NNE RTD in Italy. In order to
define policy orientations, the relevant persons (administration, research...) meet and
exchange views.
The European priorities defined in Framework Programmes are included in the
reflection on PNR priorities. The priorities of the PNR 2003-2006 refer to
•
International major trends
•
European Union identified priorities, i.e. FP6 thematic priorities
On this basis programmatic choices for Italy have been defined. The 2003-2006 PNR
is explicitly updated to allow Italian research organisation to participate to FP.
Also, the ENEA Three-year Plan has been developed taking account of the following
key reference points
•
An analysis of ENEA’s mission and tasks as defined in Italian Legislative Decree
no. 36/99
•
A definition of strategical R&D priorities in several fields
•
The structure of competencies and actual capabilities as well as existing fields of
excellence
•
The role of ENEA in the research field
•
Technical and scientific support to the Public Administration and enterprises
•
The Guidelines set out by the 2001-2003 National Research Programme
•
The Recommendations set out by the sixth EU Five-year Research Plan”
143
142
IEA Italy 2003 review.
143
www.enea.it
Italy
337
In practice, ENEA’s overall policy is elaborated mainly by the presidency (3
Commissioners in usual times), in a consultation process with ENEA’s Research Unit
Directors.
Also, ENEA publishes every year an Energy and Environment Report, the analyses of
which are used as a basis for much of the policy work done by the ministries. It has to
be noted, in the same way, that ENEA acts as an advisory organisation for the
ministries (research, environment, industry), including through the mobility of people
between the ministries and the agency.
Many funds exist in Italy, managed by the different ministries (the Fund for
universities to finance research projects of national interest, the Fund for investments
in basic research, etc., of MIUR, or the Fund for technological innovation of MAP,
for example). There are many problems concerning the co-ordination of government’s
funding, to avoid repetitions.
This means that there are no real policy cycles, as resources and programmes may
change every year. There is quite no fixed budgetary planning, therefore it is hard for
researchers and research institutions to engage themselves for more than a year.
As well, there is
no scientific ex-post evaluation
of projects; they are only evaluated
by expert groups before being funded (project selection on the criterion of relevance).
Milestones are regularly checked during the project’s life. A “successful” project is a
project leading to “good results.” Recently the CIVR (Committee for research
evaluation) has produced guidelines for evaluation but they are not yet applied.
Italy
338
Annexe A
Acronyms
CESI
Research subsidiary of ENEL
CIPE
InterMinisterial Committee for Economic Planning
CNR
National Centre for Research
DPEF
Economic and Financial Programmatic Document
ENEA
National Agency for New Technology, Energy and Environment
ENEL
Italian Electricity company
ENI
Italian oil and natural gas company
ERA
European Research Area
FP
Framework programme
GDP
Gross domestic product
IEA
International Energy Agency
MAP
Ministry of Productive Activities
MIUR
Ministry of Education, University and Research
NNE
Non nuclear energy
PNR
National Research Programme
RTD
Research and technical development
SME
Small and medium enterprise
TPES
Total primary energy supply
Annexe B
Bibliography
IEA Italy report 2003
Ministry of Productive Activities, Report on national fossil fuels RD&D programmes,
Prepared for the working party on Fossil fuels of IEA, June 2003
ENEA, Rapporto Energia e Ambiente 2002, part 1 L’analisi (Energy and
Environment report 2002), 2003
Linee Guida per la Politica Scientifica e Tecnologica del Governo, 19 April 2002
144
ENEL, annual report 2002
ENI, annual report 2002
IEA Italy report 1999
144
This is the National Research Programme.
European Commission
EUR 21614/2 – Non-Nuclear Energy Research in Europe - A comparative study
Luxembourg: Offi ce for Offi cial Publications of the European Communities
2005 – 342 pp. – 21.0 x 29.7 cm
ISBN 92-894-9370-4
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: research@cec.eu.int
Internet: http://europa.eu.int/comm/research/rtdinfo/index_en.html
EUROPEAN COMMISSION
Directorate-General for Research
Directorate J-Energy
Unit 1 - Policy and strategy
Helpdesk: rtd-ernergy@cec.eu.int
Internet: http://europa.eu.int/comm/research/energy/index_en.htm/
SALES AND SUBSCRIPTIONS
Publications for sale produced by the Offi ce for Offi cial 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?
• Go to the Publications Offi ce website http://publications.eu.int/
• Or apply for a paper copy by fax (352) 2929 42758
Non-Nuclear Energy Research
in Europe
–
A comparative study
C o m m u n i t y re s e a rc h
E U R O P E A N
COMMISSION
ST
U
D
Y
VOLUME 2
Country Reports A – I
15
KI-NB-21614-EN-N
EUR 21614/2
Non-Nuclear Ener
gy Resear
ch
in Eur
ope
– A comparative study V
olume 2 – Country Reports A – I
Building a European Research Area for Non-Nuclear Energy calls for co-operation
among EU Member States, Associated States and the EU going beyond the mere EU
Framework Programmes. But this requires a detailed knowledge of European energy
research. This report describes, compares and analyses the energy RTD systems of 33
European countries, looks at existing multilateral co-operation schemes and provides
a synthetic picture of actors, structures, priorities and priority-setting processes.
EUR 21614/2
