Search

This paper analyses the implications of a complete halt of natural gas flows from Russia to the European Union (EU). The most challenging time horizon for the EU will be the winter of 2022/23 due to the little time available to roll out necessary measures to diversify the gas supply and develop alternatives to Russian gas. We explore supply availability and constraints as well as demand curtailment options. The challenge of refilling EU gas storage levels at the current abnormal prices for natural gas is also addressed. Finally, we consider the Russian standpoint and whether they would be able to redirect gas flows where European demand to suddenly dry up. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Uncertainty regarding the supply of Russian natural gas is causing European gas and electricity prices to become extremely high and volatile. Coordination is essential to ensure that disruptions during difficult winter months do not lead to a break-up of the EU internal gas market with potentially serious political repercussions. One part of the EU response is the establishment of an EU Energy Platform for the purchase of gas, LNG and hydrogen. The platform can be developed into an effective emergency tool - if Member States buy gas jointly they will find it much easier to let markets allocate scarce volumes across borders in case of a full supply disruption from Russia. We detail two complementary proposals to achieve this. First, there should be EU-wide auctioning of a remuneration for filling storage sites in specific regions. Secondly, EU demand for additional LNG quantities, and the sourcing of this on international markets, should be coordinated through a platform - this creates a transparent market for said volumes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Deutsches Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung: DIW-Wochenbericht is the property of DIW Berlin and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Current technological improvements are yet to put the world on track to net-zero, which will require the uptake of transformative low-carbon innovations to supplement mitigation efforts. However, the role of such innovations is not yet fully understood; some of these 'miracles' are considered indispensable to Paris Agreement-compliant mitigation, but their limitations, availability, and potential remain a source of debate. We evaluate such potentially game-changing innovations from the experts' perspective, aiming to support the design of realistic decarbonisation scenarios and better-informed net-zero policy strategies. In a worldwide survey, 260 climate and energy experts assessed transformative innovations against their mitigation potential, at-scale availability and/or widescale adoption, and risk of delayed diffusion. Hierarchical clustering and multi-criteria decision-making revealed differences in perceptions of core technological innovations, with next-generation energy storage, alternative building materials, iron-ore electrolysis, and hydrogen in steelmaking emerging as top priorities. Instead, technologies highly represented in well-below-2°C scenarios seemingly feature considerable and impactful delays, hinting at the need to re-evaluate their role in future pathways. Experts' assessments appear to converge more on the potential role of other disruptive innovations, including lifestyle shifts and alternative economic models, indicating the importance of scenarios including non-technological and demand-side innovations. To provide insights for expert elicitation processes, we finally note caveats related to the level of representativeness among the 260 engaged experts, the level of their expertise that may have varied across the examined innovations, and the potential for subjective interpretation to which the employed linguistic scales may be prone to. • The study evaluates 27 low-carbon innovations based on a global survey of 260 experts. • Innovations were clustered and ranked based on mitigation potentials and feasibility. • Next-generation energy storage had the highest potential among examined technologies. • Most non-technological innovations feature uniformly high potentials and feasibility. • We note gaps among different stakeholder groups—e.g., regarding building innovations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]