Making the TEN-E Regulation Compatible with the Green Deal: Eligibility, Selection, and Cost Allocation for PCIs

Robert Schuman Centre - Policy Brief, Issue 2020/2, July 2020

16 Pages Posted: 4 Nov 2020

See all articles by Tim Schittekatte

Tim Schittekatte

European University Institute - Florence School of Regulation; MIT Energy Initiative

Alberto Pototschnig

European University Institute - Florence School of Regulation

Leonardo Meeus

European University Institute; European University Institute - Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies (RSCAS)

Tooraj Jamasb

Copenhagen School of Energy Infrastructure Department of Economics, Copenhagen Business School

Manuel Llorca

Copenhagen Business School

Date Written: July 2020

Abstract

The European Green Deal calls for a revision of the TEN-Regulation (Regulation (EU) No 347/2013). In this Policy Paper, we assess the experience with the implementation of the TEN-E Regulation and how it can be revised to align it with the new full decarbonisation objective. The TEN-E Regulation defined several categories of projects that can obtain the PCI status: electricity, gas, smart grids, oil, and CO2 networks. First, oil networks can be excluded, while the role of gas networks is more debatable. Gas pipelines need to support the pursuit of the decarbonisation goal. Second, power-to-X technologies, electric vehicle charging stations and (smart) gas distribution grids can be added to the scope. The TEN-E Regulation attempted to make the selection of strategically important EU energy infrastructure more objective. We offer three recommendations in this regard. First, to make the TYDNP an integrated exercise over all energy vectors using an open-source model. Second, to make the scenarios used in the TYNDPs subject to the approval of the European Commission. To reallocate the approval decision for (harmonised) CBA methodologies from the European Commission to ACER. Third, the TEN-E Regulation introduced a CBCA procedure. Also, CEF-E funding to support PCIs was made available. We offer two recommendations in this regard. First, CBCA decisions should become more ambitious than the minimum standard recommended by ACER in 2015. All jurisdictions involved should end up with similar benefit-to-cost ratios to increase commitment. Second, affordability should be the only award criterion that is linked to CEF-E funding. This award criterion shall complement two eligibility conditions: 1/ the project is strategic to reach the EU decarbonisation goal; and 2/the project is regulated.

Suggested Citation

Schittekatte, Tim and Pototschnig, Alberto and Meeus, Leonardo and Jamasb, Tooraj and Llorca, Manuel, Making the TEN-E Regulation Compatible with the Green Deal: Eligibility, Selection, and Cost Allocation for PCIs (July 2020). Robert Schuman Centre - Policy Brief, Issue 2020/2, July 2020, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3692998

Tim Schittekatte (Contact Author)

European University Institute - Florence School of Regulation ( email )

Florence
Italy

MIT Energy Initiative ( email )

77 Massachusetts Avenue
50 Memorial Drive
Cambridge, MA 02139-4307
United States

Alberto Pototschnig

European University Institute - Florence School of Regulation ( email )

Florence
Italy

Leonardo Meeus

European University Institute ( email )

Fiesole, Tuscany
Italy

European University Institute - Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies (RSCAS) ( email )

Villa La Fonte, via delle Fontanelle 18
50016 San Domenico di Fiesole
Florence, Florence 50014
Italy

Tooraj Jamasb

Copenhagen School of Energy Infrastructure Department of Economics, Copenhagen Business School ( email )

Manuel Llorca

Copenhagen Business School ( email )

Solbjerg Plads 3
Frederiksberg C, DK - 2000
Denmark

Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on SSRN?

Paper statistics

Downloads
25
Abstract Views
132
PlumX Metrics