à ft 
*ft* EUROOPAN YHTEISÖJEN KOMISSIO 
Bryssel, 15.03.1996 
KOM(96) 92 lopull. 
KOMISSION KERTOMUS 
NEUVOSTOLLE. EUROOPAN PARLAMENTILLE 
JA TALOUS- JA SOSIAALIKOMITEALLE 
yhteisön menettelyn toteuttamiseksi kaasusta ja sähköstä teollisilta käyttäjiltä 
perittävien hintojen avoimuuden takaamiseksi annetun neuvoston direktiivin 
90/377/ETY soveltamisesta 
(komission esittämä 29 päivänä kesäkuuta 1990 annetun neuvoston direktiivin 
90/377/ETY 8 artiklan mukaisesti) 

TIIVISTELMÄ JA SUUNTAVIIVAT 
Tämä kokoava kertomus hintojen avoimuudesta annetun direktiivin soveltamisesta on 
lajissaan toinen1. Siinä analysoidaan 29 päivänä kesäkuuta 1990 annetun neuvoston 
direktiivin 90/377/ETY toimivuutta sekä hintojen vertailevaa arviointia. Se on laadittu 
direktiivin 8 artiklan mukaisesti. 
Kertomuksen ENSIMMÄISESSÄ OSASSA, joka koskee direktiivin toimivuutta, 
kuvaillaan komission yksiköiden kohtaamia vaikeuksia direktiivin täytäntöönpanemisessa. 
Kutakin jäsenvaltiota kehotetaan erikseen parantamaan tietojen keräämisen edellytyksiä, 
jotta tietojen lähettämiselle asetettuja määräaikoja noudatettaisiin yhtenäisesti. Ottaen 
huomioon tutkimukseen osallistuvien maiden määrän kasvun on yhä vaikeampaa hyväksyä 
sitä, että yhden jäsenvaltion laiminlyönti tai myöhästyminen voi estää tulosten 
julkaisemisen. 
Komissio tutkii energian hintoja käsittelevän työryhmän asiantuntijoiden kanssa direktiivin 
toimivuuden parantamista erityisesti hintavertailutietoihin pohjautuen. Varsinkin hintojen 
luotettavuuden ja edustavuuden parantamista korostetaan. 
Ottaen huomioon direktiivin 1 artiklan 3 kohdassa säädettyä jaottelua koskevan 
ilmoituksen saamisessa havaitut vaikeudet kertomuksessa on uusia ehdotuksia 
kuluttajaluokkien soveltamisrajojen määrittämiseksi uudelleen. On myös erityisesti 
pyrittävä hintajärjestelmiä koskevassa 2 kohdassa säädettyjen ilmoitusten sisältöjen 
tarkentamiseen. 
Merkintähinnan osalta komissio kiinnittää jäsenvaltioiden huomiota siihen, että 
asiantuntijaryhmän on pikaisesti päästävä yhteisymmärrykseen oletetulle kuluttajalle 
ominaisen merkintähintaan perustuvan tarpeen ominaisuuksien määrittämisestä "sähköä" 
koskevan liitteen 15 kohdan toisen alakohdan mukaisesti ja mainitun liitteen edustavien 
erityisseikkojen, hintojen alennusten, kuluttajien lukumäärän ja luokkakohtaisen 
kokonaiskulutuksen ilmoittamista koskevan 16-21 kohdan velvoitteiden noudattamisesta. 
Näiden tietojen puuttuessa merkintähinnat eivät anna kuvaa vastaaville kuluttajille 
tosiasiassa määrätyistä hinnoista eikä niitä voida käyttää analyysia varten. 
Euroopan yhteisöjen tilastotoimisto jatkaa direktiivistä tiedottamista entiseen tapaan. Se 
tutkii tapoja valvoa direktiivissä säädettyjen ilmoitusten yhteydessä saatujen tietojen 
luotettavuutta tekemällä soveltuvin osin pistokokeita tiettyjen kuluttajien keskuudessa. 
Direktiivin maantieteellinen kattavuus on parantunut erityisesti Saksassa ja uusien 
jäsenvaltioiden liittymisen ansiosta, mutta muissa tapauksissa on edelleen jäljellä tiettyjä 
aukkoja. 
Vaikka sähkön hintojen avoimuus on tyydyttävää, kaasusta perittävien hintojen avoimuus 
sen sijaan huononee suurimpien kuluttajien tasolla. Komissio kehottaa asiantuntijoita 
liittymään mukaan tutkimaan tämän huononemisen syitä parannuskeinojen löytämiseksi. 
ks. KOM(93) 666 lopull., 16.12.1993 
2u 
Komissio on myös huolissaan mahdollisista seurannaisilmiöistä, kun kaupallista 
poikkeusta pitää hinnat luottamuksellisina pyritään lähes säännönmukaisesti pitämään 
kiinni tietojen antamisen kustannuksella. Hintailmoitukset ovatkin vähentyneet siellä, 
missä hintoja on alettu vapauttaa tuottajien voimakkaan kasvun ja sen aiheuttaman 
markkinoiden pirstoutumisen seurauksena. Yhä useammin käy niin, ettei kukaan tuottaja 
onnistu saamaan tarvittavaa kolmea kuluttajaa samaan luokkaan, jotta poikkeus pitää 
hinnat luottamuksellisina voitaisiin poistaa ja vastaava hinta ilmoittaa. Olisi 
täsmennettävä, että kolmen kuluttajan sääntö koskee luonnollisesti paikan eikä tuottajan 
käsitettä. Komissio varoittaa tästä kehityssuunnasta, sillä avoimuus näissä paikoissa on 
edelleen tarpeen voimassa olevasta sääntelyjärjestelmästä tai markkinajärjestelyn tyypistä 
riippumatta. 
* * * 
Euroopan yhteisöjen tilastotoimiston keräämien tietojen analysointi direktiivin yhteydessä 
muodostaa kertomuksen TOISEN OSAN. Siinä rajoitutaan ainoastaan sähkön ja kaasun 
hintoihin, joiden ilmoittamisesta säädetään direktiivin 8 artiklassa. 
Tämän analyysin poliittisena merkityksenä kaasun ja sähkön sisämarkkinoista parhaillaan 
käytävien keskustelujen yhteydessä on vastata niihin lukuisiin kysymyksiin, joita asetetaan 
erityisesti sähkön ja kaasun hintakehityksestä ja niiden mahdollisesta 
yhdenmukaistamisesta. 
Tässä mielessä vaikkakaan hinnat eivät ole merkittävästi muuttuneet sitten edellisen 
kertomuksen, merkittävät kurssivaihtelut ovat sitä vastoin vaikuttaneet valuuttoihin 
muuttaen perinpohjaisesti jäsenvaltioiden välisiä hintasuhteita. 
Tässä kertomuksen osassa tarkastellaan yhtäältä kunkin kansallisen valuutan osalta kunkin 
jäsenvaltion sisäistä hintakehitystä kehityskulun määrittämiseksi ja toisaalta vertaillaan 
ostovoimastandardeja. Niitä käyttämällä voidaan poistaa valuuttapariteettien vaihteluiden 
aiheuttamat vääristymät. Ostovoimastandardien vertailujen avulla havaitut kehityssuunnat 
ovat hyvin lähellä niitä kehitysnäkymiä, jotka ilmenevät ecuina ilmaistuja hintoja 
vertailemalla. Ecuina ilmoitetuista hinnoista laadittuja taulukoita on tämän kertomuksen 
liitteenä. 
Sähkön hinnat ovat kaiken kaikkiaan tosiasiassa hieman laskeneet tammikuusta 1985 
tammikuuhun 1995. Kaasun hinnat ovat sen sijaan laskeneet huomattavasti seuraten näin 
energian ja erityisesti öljytuotteiden maailmanhintojen yleistä kehitystä. 
Sähköalalla hinnanalennukset kuvastavat teollisuuden rakennemuutosten aikaansaamaa 
tuottavuuden kasvua otettaessa sellaisia uusia sähköntuotantomuotoja käyttöön kuin 
sähkön ja höyryn yhdistetty tuotantoja muut uudet tekniikat, jotka liittyvät johtamistapaan 
ja markkinointiin (demand side management ja integrated resources planning). 
Saksaa lukuun ottamatta jäsenvaltioissa on havaittavissa selvää kaasun hintojen 
yhdenmukaistumista. Sähkön hintahaitari on sitä vastoin kasvanut, mikä voisi olla 
osoituksena siitä, että sähköala piittaa kilpailusta kaasualaa vähemmän. Useissa 
jäsenmaissa tyypilliset suurimmat viitekuluttajat hyötyvät kuitenkin edullisista ja 
suhteellisen samantasoisista sähkön hinnoista. Nämä hinnat ovat ryhmittyneet unionin 
keskellä raja-aluevyöhykkeelle, missä tariffit ja hintarakenteet näyttävät olevan siten 
laadittuja, että suurkuluttajille tarjotaan kilpailukykyisiä hintoja. Tämä on epäilemättä 
3Q 
seurausta teollisuustuotteiden sisämarkkinoiden avautumisen aiheuttamista paineista 
sähkön tuottajahintojen muodostukseen. 
Eräissä tapauksissa tämä tapahtuu ottamatta huomioon yrityskustannusten todellista 
rakennetta ja siten pienkuluttajien kustannuksella, mistä osoituksena on tyypillisten 
äärihintojen erojen kasvu. Tällainen ristiinmenevä tukeminen on vielä huomattavampaa 
kaasualalla, missä tyypillisten hintojen ääripäiden välit ovat tuntuvasti merkittävämpiä 
kuin sähköalalla. Nämä erot olisivat olleet vieläkin suurempia, jos käytettävissä olisi ollut 
tyypillistä suurinta kuluttajaa koskevat tiedot. 
Yhteisön tasolla kaikkien esimerkkitapausten äärihintojen väli oli teollisuuskäytössä 
tammikuussa 1995 sähkön osalta 5 ja kaasun osalta 6,5. Tämä ero on enemmän kuin mitä 
voidaan järkevästi selittää taloudellisilla syillä eikä se voi johtua muusta kuin kansallisesta 
ja jopa alueellisesta markkinoiden lokeroitumisesta. Tämä ilmiö on erityisen korostunut 
Saksassa, missä kaasun hintojen hajauma on suurin koko yhteisössä kattaen yhteisön koko 
ylemmän otantapuoliskon sähkön osalta. Tämä tilanne paljastaa lisäksi eräissä tapauksessa 
tehdyt lähes kannattamattomat sijoitukset tai puutteelliset teolliset rakenteet. 
Direktiivissä puollettu hintojen julkisuus olisi saattanut aikaansaada hintojen mukautuksia 
siellä missä ne poikkeavat liikaa tavanomaisesta. Itse asiassa näyttää siltä, ettei hintojen 
avoimuus voi yksinään yhdenmukaistaa hintoja merkittävästi niin kauan kuin 
verkkoenergiamarkkinat eivät ole avoinna kilpailulle. Nämä toteamukset osoittavat 
aseman, joka hintojen avoimuudella voi olla sellaisten poikkeavuuksien havaitsemisessa, 
jotka voivat olla haitaksi energiapolitiikan tavoitteiden saavuttamiselle, energian 
sisämarkkinoiden toteutumiselle tai kuluttajille. 
Komissio toteuttaa pyrkimyksiään asiantuntijaryhmässä hintojen avoimuuden 
parantamiseksi, kaikissa jäsenvaltioissa kuluttajien laajan luokkiin 
jakautumisen ja markkinahintoja seuraavan täydellisen tiedonvälityksen 
toteuttamiseksi, tariffointijärjestelmien sekä hintatietojen hankkimisen ja 
esittämisen yhdenmukaistamiseksi, jotta niiden vertailtavuus paranisi. Nämä 
kehityssuunnat ovat yhdenmukaiset edellisen kertomuksen direktiivin 
soveltamista koskevien ja edelleen voimaan jäävien päätelmien kanssa (katso 
asiakirja KOM(93) 666 lopull., 16.12.1993, s. 8). 
Komissio tutkii myös mahdollisuuksia muuttaa direktiiviä "kuluttajaluokka"-
ja "paikka"-käsitteen tarkentamiseksi ja direktiivin maantieteellisen 
kattavuuden parantamiseksi. 
4^ 
CONTENTS 
Summary and general approach 
PART ONE : IMPLEMENTATION OF THE DIRECTIVE 
1. Content of the Directive 
2. Legal aspects 
2.1 Implementation 
2.2 Amendments to the Directive 
3. Extension to new countries 
3.1 The new Member States 
3.2 European Economic Area 
3.3 Central and Eastern European countries 
4. Operation of the Directive 
4.1 Price data 
•v. 
4.1.1 Evaluation of the situation 
4.1.2 Marker prices 
4.1.3 Application of the rules on confidentiality 
4.1.4 Breakdown of consumers and the corresponding volumes 
4.1.5 Verification of the data 
4.1.6 Definition of the locations 
4.2 The price systems 
5. Publication of results 
PART TWO : ANALYSIS OF RESULTS 
Price situation and trends 
6. Method employed 
6.1 Choice of measurement units 
6.2 Choice of sample 
6.3 Incidence of indirect taxation 
7. Analysis of electricity prices to industrial users in the Community 
7.1 Electricity price situation and trends by location in national currency on 
1 January 1985, 1990 and 1995 
(a) Productivity 
(b) Degressivity 
7.2 Price situation and trends by location in PPS 
7.2.1 Ranking of locations 
7.2.2. Changes in ranking between 1990 and 1995 
7.2.3 Electricity prices in ECU 
7.2.4 Convergence 
8. Analysis of gas prices to industrial users in the Community 
8.1 Gas price situation and trends by location in national currency on 1 January 1985, 
1990 and 1995 
8.2 Price situation and trends by location in PPS 
8.2.1 Ranking of locations on 1 January 1995 
8.2.2 Gas prices in ECU 
8.2.3 Convergence 
ANNEXES 
1. Council Directive 90/377/EEC of 29 June 1990 : incorporation into national 
legislation 
2. (a) Standard industrial electricity consumers 
(b) Standard industrial gas consumers 
3. Yearbooks and "Statistics in focus" published to date 
4. Electricity prices (net of taxes) to industrial users in Germany 
5. Electricity price situation and trends by location in national currency on 1 January 
1985, 1990 and 1995 
6. EUR 12: Electricity prices (net of taxes) to industrial users in PPS/10 MWh on 
1 January 1995 
7. EUR 12: Electricity prices (net of taxes) to industrial users in PPS/10 MWh on 
1 January 1990 
8. Ranking of locations in increasing order of price on 1 January 1995 
9. Ranking of locations in increasing order of price on 1 January 1990 
10. Electricity prices in ECU per 10 MWh per year on 1 January 1985, 1990 and 
1995 
11. Gas prices (net of tax) to industrial users by location in national currency : 
situation and trends on 1 January 1985, 1990 and 1995 
12. EUR 12: Gas prices (net of tax) to industrial users in PPS/100 GJ on 1 January 
1995 
13. EUR 12: Gas prices (net of tax) to industrial users in PPS/100 GJ on 1 January 
1990 
14. Gas prices (net of tax) to industrial users in Germany on 1 January 1990 and 1 
January 1995 
15. Ranking of locations in increasing order of price on 1 January 1995 
16. Ranking of locations in increasing order of price on 1 January 1990 
17. Gas prices in ECU in 1985, 1990 and 1995 
GRAPHS 
I. Electricity prices 1985, 1990 and 1995 : comparison between the PPS and ECU 
values at a sample of 14 locations 
II. Gas prices 1985, 199Ô and 1995 : comparison between the PPS and ECU values 
at a sample of 12 locations 
SUMMARY AND GENERAL APPROACH 
This summary report on one hand the operation of the Price Transparency Directive is 
the second of its kind(*). It analyses implementation of Council Directive 90/377/EEC of 
29 June 1990 and on the other hand it compares price evolution. It was written to 
comply with Article 8 of the Directive. 
Part One of this report, concerning implementation of the Directive, describes the 
difficulties encountered by the Commission with its application. The Member States will 
be asked individually to improve the conditions for collecting the data to ensure full 
compliance with the submission dates. The increasing number of countries participating 
in the survey makes it less and less acceptable for negligence or tardiness on the part of 
a single Member State to block publication of the results. 
The Commission will examine, with the experts on the Working Party on Energy Prices, 
the improvements to be made to operation of the Directive based, in particular, on the 
lessons learned from the price comparison. The accent will be placed on obtaining more 
reliable and more representative prices. 
In response to the difficulties encountered with obtaining the breakdown referred to in 
point 3 of Article 1 of the Directive, the report contains new proposals to redefine the 
limits for application of the consumer categories. A particular effort will also have to be 
made to define the content of the notifications on the price systems, as provided for in 
point 2 of the same Article. 
As regards the marker prices, the Commission draws the Member States' attention to the 
urgent need to reach agreement within the group of experts on the definition of the 
demand characteristics of the notional consumer to which the marker price applies, in 
accordance with the second paragraph of point 15 of the Annex on electricity, and to 
meet the obligations imposed by points 16 to 21 of the same Annex concerning 
notification of the representative special factors and price reductions, of the number of 
consumers and of total consumption by category. Without these details, the marker prices 
will not reflect the prices actually charged to the relevant consumers and will be unusable 
for analysis purposes. 
As in the past, the SOEC will continue to play its information role for the Directive. It 
will study means of checking the reliability of the data obtained from the communications 
provided for by the Directive and, where necessary, conduct direct surveys of certain 
consumers. 
The geographical coverage of the Directive has improved, particularly in Germany and 
with the extension to the new Member States, although gaps remain in other cases. 
Electricity prices are transparent enough, but gas prices to the biggest consumers, by 
contrast, have become less transparent. The Commission will ask the experts to study 
the causes in order to remedy this deterioration. 
(*} See COM(93)666 final of 16 December 1993. 
5 
The Commission is also concerned about the drift towards making the exemption on the 
grounds of commercial confidentiality the rule, to the detriment of information. In 
particular, there has been a fall in price notifications from the locations where 
liberalization has produced a proliferation of suppliers and the ensuing fragmentation of 
the market. More and more often no single supplier musters the three consumers required 
in a given category in order to lift the exemption on confidentiality grounds and publish 
the corresponding price. It should be made clear that the three consumers rule applies, 
of course, to the location, not supplier. The Commission warns against this drift since 
transparency remains essential, whatever the regulatory framework or howsoever the 
market is organized. 
* * * 
Part Two of the report analyses the price data collected by the SOEC under the Directive. 
It is restricted exclusively to the gas and electricity prices submitted under Article 8 of 
the Directive. 
In the context of the negotiations in progress on the internal gas and electricity market, 
the political importance of this analysis lies in the fact that it answers many questions 
arising, particularly on electricity and gas price trends and any possible convergence. 
In this respect, although no significant price changes have been recorded since the last 
report, sharp currency fluctuation has brought far-reaching changes to the relative prices 
between the Member States. 
This part of the report examines the price movements in each Member State in national 
currency first, in order to establish the trend, and then makes comparisons in terms of 
purchasing power standard (PPS), which provides a means of removing the distortion 
caused by fluctuations in currency parities. The trends observed from the PPS 
comparisons closely match the comparisons of the ECU prices. Tables setting out the 
ECU prices are annexed. 
Throughout the Community electricity prices fell slightly, in real terms, between 
January 1985 and January 1995. Gas prices, by contrast, fell considerably, following the 
world price trend for energy in general and for oil products in particular. 
The falling electricity prices reflect the productivity gains obtained from industrial 
restructuring, the introduction of new generating technologies, such as combined heat and 
power production, and other new marketing and management methods (demand side 
management and integrated resources planning). 
With the exception of Germany, a marked convergence of gas prices was observed in all 
Member States. By contrast, the spread of electricity prices has widened, which could 
indicate greater inertia in the electricity industry than in the gas sector in response to 
competition. However, in several Member States the biggest typical consumers qualify 
for low electricity prices which are relatively similar. These prices are closer together 
in central, frontier regions of the Union, where the tariffs and price structures seem to be 
designed to offer competitive prices to big consumers. Beyond doubt, this must be seen 
as one result of the pressure exerted on electricity generators' pricing by the opening-up 
of the internal market in industrial products. 
In some cases, this has been done without taking account of the generator's real cost 
structure and, hence, to the detriment of small consumers, as indicated by the widening 
gap between the maximum and minimum prices in the sample. This cross-subsidization 
is even more marked in the gas industry, where the gaps between the maximum and 
minimum prices in the sample are wider than for electricity. They would have been 
wider still had data been available for the largest consumer in the sample. 
At Community level, the interval between the maximum and minimum prices for the 
entire sample of industrial users gave a factor of 5 for electricity and of 6.5 for gas in 
January 1995. This is bigger than can be reasonably explained by economic causes and 
can only stem from national and even regional fragmentation of the markets. This 
phenomenon is particularly marked in Germany, where the price spread is even wider 
than in the Community as a whole in the case of gas and covers the whole of the top half 
of the Community sample in the case of electricity. In some cases, this situation is also 
a sign of uneconomic investments or deficient industrial structures. 
The publication of prices provided for by the Directive possibly prompted adjustments 
of prices too far from the norm. It does not seem capable, on its own, of bringing about 
any significant convergence of prices until the grid-based energy markets are opened up 
to competition. These conclusions illustrate the role which price transparency can play 
in detecting anomalies likely to hamper achievement of the energy policy objectives and 
completion of the internal energy market or to damage consumers' interests. 
The Commission will continue its efforts within the group of experts to 
improve price transparency and obtain the exhaustive breakdown of consumers 
by categories in every Member State and full submission of the data 
concerning the marker prices, with a view to making the tariff systems, the 
supply conditions and the format of the price data more homogeneous to allow 
optimum comparability. This approach is in line with the conclusions reached 
in the first report on operation of the Directive, which still apply (cf. p. 6 of 
document COM(93)666 final of 16 December 1993). 
It will also examine the need to amend the Directive in order to clarify the 
concepts of "consumer categories" and "location" and improve the 
geographical coverage of the Directive. 
PART ONE 
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE DIRECTIVE 
1. Content of the Directive 
Council Directive 90/377/EEC of 29 June 1990 established a procedure requiring 
the Member States to communicate to the Statistical Office of the European 
Communities (SOEC) the prices of gas and electricity to industrial users, the price 
systems in use, the breakdown of consumers and the corresponding volumes. 
The data on prices, price systems and tariffs are assembled on 1 January 
and 1 July each year and sent to the SOEC for publication in May and 
November respectively. These data have been collected following the 
procedure laid down in the Directive since 1 July 1991. 
The breakdown of industrial consumers and the corresponding volumes are 
submitted every two years These data are covered by the rules on 
commercial confidentiality and may not be published directly. They 
enable the SOEC to calculate the weighted average prices and the national 
and Community price indices, which may be published. 
2. Legal aspects 
2.1 Implementation 
Every Member State has incorporated the Directive into its national law, except 
Spain, against which an infringement procedure has been initiated for this reason. 
Nevertheless, this gap in the legislation has not prevented regular submission of 
full data by the Spanish administration Details of the national measures adopted 
to implement the Directive are set out in Annex 1. 
2.2 Amendments to the Directive 
The Commission has started the procedure to amend the Annexes to the Directive 
to transfer Berlin from the North/Central Zone to the Eastern Zone. In practice, 
the notifications for Berlin have taken this into account since 1 July 1993. The 
amendment is about to be published in the Official Journal. 
3. Extension to new countries 
3.1 The new Member States 
The accession of three new countries to the European Union has prompted the 
addition of new locations to the Annexes to the Directive. This automatic 
technical adjustment was contained in the Act of Accession. The locations are 
Vienna, Upper Austria and Tyrol in Austria and the country as a whole (national 
price) in the case of Finland and Sweden. It is fair to ask how representative 
these national prices are for these two competitive markets. The first notifications 
were submitted to the SOEC by the dates stipulated. 
3.2 European Economic Area 
The Treaty on the European Economic Area likewise provides for submission of 
the data provided for by the Directive to the SOEC. In practice, only Norway is 
under this obligation, as both Iceland and Liechtenstein are exempted. Norway 
has started to transmit data to the SOEC already. The data for the enlarged 
Community plus Norway will be given in forthcoming SOEC publications. 
3.3 Central and Eastern European countries 
The Commission's White Paper on approximation of the legislation of the 
countries of Central and Eastern Europe provides for applying the most important 
Community legislation on energy to these countries. The Directive on the 
transparency of gas and electricity prices is one of the key measures mentioned. 
4. Operation of the Directive 
Collaboration between the SOEC and the national bodies responsible for collecting 
the data in the Member States has been satisfactory. The national experts have 
been tackling the practical problems created by the technical and commercially 
sensitive nature of the work with a will to succeed, although this does not 
necessarily mean that the solutions offered have always been the fastest or most 
satisfactory. 
* 
4.1 Price data 
4.1.1 Evaluation of the situation 
All the data on electricity prices have been received and published, except in the 
case of the United Kingdom, where full data are available for London only. In 
the case of gas, it is becoming increasingly difficult to obtain data on the biggest 
typical consumers. The SOEC had received only two figures for the entire 
European Union in January 1995. Also, the submission dates set in the Directive 
are not always observed, leading to delays in publication of "Statistics in focus" 
(formerly "Rapid reports"). 
4.1.2 Marker prices 
The marker prices required by Part II of the electricity annex to the Directive 
apply to consumers with maximum demand above the volume set for typical 
reference consumers (i.e. above 10 MW). They apply to three categories of 
industrial consumer with maximum demand in the region of: 
25 MW, covering consumers with maximum net demand of between 17.5 
and 37.5 MW, 
50 MW (maximum net demand of between 37.5 and 62.5 MW), and 
75 MW (maximum net demand of between 62.5 and 75.0 MW). 
V, 
These marker prices are available from nine Member States but not from 
Denmark, Ireland and Luxembourg, which have fewer than the three consumers 
in each category provided for in the Directive. Member States' attention is drawn 
to the fact that once the number of consumers in any category reaches three (the 
point at which the confidentiality clause ceases to apply), submission of the data 
becomes compulsory with effect from the next submission date, without any need 
for a reminder from the SOEC. 
Some Member States have yet to define the supply characteristics which apply to 
the marker price (load factor, distribution between peak and off-peak periods, 
etc.). Without these details, the SOEC is unable to guarantee that the data are 
homogeneous. The. same applies to the special factors specified in paragraph 17 
of the electricity annex which may be applied to reduce prices and of which 
notification must be given as provided for in paragraph 18 of the Annex. The 
Commission departments concerned will examine, with each Member State 
concerned, the obstacles to regular submission of this information and ways of 
improving the quality of the information published. 
4.1.3 Application of the rules on confidentiality 
The growing difficulties encountered in certain Member States with collection of 
the prices stem largely from misapplication of the rules on confidentiality in 
paragraph 20 of the Annex on gas and paragraph 19 of the Annex on electricity. 
In practice, the immediate consequence of liberalization of a national electricity 
or gas industry is to increase the number of transactions with different suppliers 
in a given region, thus making it increasingly difficult to find three consumers 
supplied by the same distributor. It must be remembered that the Directive 
stipulates that there must be at least three consumers per category in the Member 
State or region concerned, but makes no mention of extending this clause to 
distributors Were this rule applied, no prices could be communicated from 
regions where there are several distributors each with fewer than three clients in 
any one category. 
By way of example, of the four locations selected in the United Kingdom, only 
London provided a full set of electricity prices in January 1995. Real price trends 
(in purchasing power standard (PSS)) in London show a general reduction from 
la to IgL between 1990 and 1995 (Ih and Ii were not submitted for January 1990). 
This ranges from a maximum reduction of 20.8% in the case of Ic to 12.1% for 
Ig, 8% for la and lb, and around 4% for Id and If. However, comparison with the 
few comparable data available for the other locations reveals different trends: 
Leeds reported increases of 6.2% for la and 9% for lb and a reduction of just 
1.8% for Id and of 9.5% for Ig. In Birmingham prices generally increased, except 
for a 17.3% reduction for Ig. In Glasgow there was an 11% increase for la and 
lb, the only consumers for which prices have been submitted since July 1994. A 
particular effort will have to be made at these locations to meet the requirements 
of the Directive. 
In the Member States with a competitive market on which prices are fixed freely, 
a national average price fails to reflect the diversity of the prices or to attain the 
principal objective declared in the first recital of the Directive, which states that 
"transparency, to the extent that it reinforces the conditions ensuring that 
competition is not distorted in the common market, is essential to the achievement 
and smooth functioning of the internal energy market." This implies that a 
sufficient number of price surveys are needed to make it possible to check that 
these conditions have indeed been met. The Working Party on Energy Prices will 
examine, in concertation with the Commission, means of supplementing the price 
data without endangering the undertakings' trade secrets. 
4.1.4 Breakdown of consumers and the corresponding volumes 
Cf. Annex 2, page 28. 
10 
The breakdown of consumers and the corresponding volumes provided for in point 
3 of article 1 of the Directive creates problems because in some Member States 
the structure of the undertakings' customer files allows no such breakdown. 
As the Directive provides no definition of the categories of consumption, the 
SOEC attempted to align them on the typical consumers (see the note from the 
SOEC to participants in the survey concerning application of 
Directive 90/377/EEC). However, it must be emphasized that Article 1 gives no 
definition of the categories and does not preclude setting other limits for the 
categories covered by the breakdowns. As experience has shown that it is 
extremely difficult to make the categories coincide with the typical consumers, 
there is nothing to prevent the Commission from proposing re-examining this 
point within the working party in order to find a formula for obtaining satisfactory 
information without impairing transparency. 
In practice, although point 3 in Article 1 clearly defines the consumers as those 
defined in the annexes, it does not say what is meant by breakdown of consumers 
or what the limits are for the individual categories. Consequently, the 
Commission considers that the data provided for in point 3 of Article 1 could 
equally well apply not to the typical consumers (who, by definition, cannot be 
taken as the limits for the categories) but to other types of sale (for example,-to 
small, medium-sized and big industrial undertakings), Which would enable the 
. SOEC to calculate the average selling prices. This assumes submission of the 
volumes marketed in each category and of the corresponding revenue. The 
Commission will put this interpretation to the Member States within the Working 
Party on Energy Prices in order to ensure the earliest, possible introduction of 
these notifications, which are essential for calculation of the weighted prices and 
of the national and Community price indices. 
4.1.5 Verification of the data 
One loophole often pointed out is the lack of means for the SOEC to check the 
accuracy of the information received. As part of its task of observing the energy 
market, the Commission could consider the possibility of enlisting specialists to 
conduct random surveys of consumers in order to check the accuracy of the prices 
collected. 
4.1.6 Definition of the locations 
In order to reflect consumers' real position as accurately as possible, the prices are 
recorded at a single location wherever possible rather than giving the average 
prices per country. These locations can be a city, conurbation or distribution 
network, as appropriate. 
The choice of location is based on how representative it is, in terms of population, 
economic importance, even geographical coverage of the country, different tariff 
districts and harmonization with the locations used for the prices of other energy 
sources to allow comparisons. Consideration could be given to including this 
definition in the annexes to the Directive, where appropriate. 
4.2 The price systems 
11 
Although the notifications of the price systems are regular enough, the 
transparency of the price systems, on the other hand, should be improved. In 
particular, analysis has shown that the standards of information are not the same 
in every Member State. The SOEC has published guidelines on ways of making 
the data supplied more consistent, with the cooperation of the experts on the 
working party. The tariff and price-setting arrangements vary widely from one 
location to another. Sometimes the prices are based on tariffs, sometimes on 
standard contracts containing terms allowing a degree of flexibility. 
5. Publication of results 
The information collected by the SOEC under the Directive is published in the 
"Rapid reports: Energy and industry" series and, since 1995, in the "Statistics in 
focus" series. Five yearbooks on energy prices have also been published in series 
4C (energy and industry) since the Directive entered into force. See Annex 3 for 
a list of publications. 
The energy prices yearbooks cover a wider field than the Directive. They provide 
long time series placing the electricity and gas prices to domestic and industrial 
users in their historical context, together with series covering all fuels, particularly 
coal, heating gas oil and residual fuel oil, with which electricity and gas compete. 
They also contain abundant information on the methods and units used and on the 
incidence of taxation on these products. Finally, they provide useful information 
on consumer price index and GDP trends in the Member States. 
12 
PART TWO 
ANALYSIS OF RESULTS 
Price situation and trends 
6. Method employed 
6.1. Choice of measurement units 
Two reference units can be used for price comparisons between Member States: 
the ECU or the PPS (purchasing power standard). Each has its own merits, 
depending on the objective of the comparison. 
The PPS is a reference unit based on the purchasing power parities between the 
different national currencies, irrespective of variations in currency parity. The 
purchasing power parities are obtained from the average price ratios between the 
different countries for the same basket of goods and services. These parities are 
scaled to keep the value of the Community's GDP the same in PPS as in ECU 
Comparison of the ECU and PPS prices between Member States shows that no 
currency corresponds exactly to the purchasing power attributed thereto. This 
phenomenon reflects the overvaluation or undervaluation of every national 
currency. The PPS/ECU ratios in Table 1 indicate the order of magnitude of this 
relative overvaluation or undervaluation of each national currency. If the ratio is 
over 100, the currency is strong and general price levels high. If it is under 100, 
the currency is weak and price levels low, as confirmed by the differences in GDP 
values between Member States, expressed in ECU. When the prices are expressed 
in ECU, the countries with an overvalued currency are at a disadvantage as their 
prices appear higher than they really are, whereas the opposite applies to countries 
with a weak national currency. These distortions can be corrected by expressing 
the prices in PPS which removes the currency overvaluation or undervaluation 
element inherent in the ECU prices. 
Table 1 
PPS and ECU values in national currency on 1 January 1990 and 1 January 1995 
Jan-90 B DK m m IT NL UK 
PPS 42.41 10.1 2.25 151 117.7 7.1 0.74 1514 42.69 2.33 111.5 
ECU 42.61 7.88 2.04 190 132 6.9 0.77 1514 42.62 2.29 179.2 
PPS/ECU 99 n 12817 UQ.29 79.47 89.16 102.89 96.10 100 10016 101.74 62.22 0 656 
0 72» 
90 10 
13 
Jan-95 B DK D GR E F IRL IT L NL P UK 
PPS 40.28 9.43 2.28 231.6 130.37 7.05 0.71 1693.38 43.11 2.29 133.25 0.69 
ECU 39 16 7.49 1.90 295.7 164.52 6.57 0.8 1999.01 39.16 2.13 196.13 0 79 
PPS/ECU 102.9 125.9 120.0 78.3 79.2 107.3 88.8 84.7 110.0 107.5 67.9 87.3 
A second problem is that the differences in general price levels between countries 
at a given time cannot reflect the differences between the prices for each 
individual product as there is only a single exchange rate. It therefore follows 
that the prices converted into nominal values at the market exchange rates are 
distorted because the currencies are under the influence of factors independent of 
national price movements. Calculation of-the purchasing power parities provides 
a means of re-establishing the real prices. Use of PPS is all the more important 
in comparisons of electricity and gas prices, where the consumer markets for the 
products are closed. 
Owners of plants in different Member States who wish to compare the 
consolidated cost of supplies to the different plants in the group will express the 
prices in ECU or in any national currency. However, the ECU and national 
currencies fluctuate constantly, under the impact of variations in the currency 
parities. Consequently, owners will prefer to use the PPS to compare the 
economic value of supplies of goods and services to each of their plants, since 
this provides a means of obtaining comparable values cleared of all factors 
associated with currency fluctuations. 
6.2. Choice of sample 
A choice had to be made from the 33 locations covered by the electricity survey 
(excluding the new Member States) to keep the report reasonably readable. 
Consequently, 14 locations were selected as suitably representative and offering 
complete price series. 
One location per Member State was chosen from Italy, Ireland, Belgium, 
Luxembourg and Greece, all of which apply a standard nationwide tariff, and 
where, therefore, the choice of locations poses no problem. In France, Paris was 
considered representative of the French market, where there are only minimal 
differences between locations. In the case of the United Kingdom, only London 
was selected as no other location had provided full series of data. Only Lisbon 
was chosen in Portugal for the same reasons. Of course these choices dictated by 
purely methodological considerations in no way prejudice the importance, stressed 
throughout this report, of keeping as many locations as possible in the survey. 
In Germany and the Netherlands no single location could reflect the diversity of 
electricity prices The locations which most frequently recorded the lowest and 
highest prices in the sample and, hence, embrace all the others were therefore 
chosen. In the Netherlands, this choice was dictated by the price gap between 
Rotterdam and North Brabant, while in Germany the main reason was the large 
number of locations (11) and the price scatter. 
14 
Annex 4 shows electricity prices in Germany in 1995 and 1990 expressed in 
national currency (DM/10 MWh). The progress on transparency can be seen from 
the increased number of locations covered and from the fact that the 1995 table 
is complete, whereas over half the data were missing in January 1990. The 
intervals between the maximum and minimum prices at each location vary 
between a factor of 2.3 and 3, slightly above the Community average (2) except 
in Dusseldorf, where it is 3.95 because of the abnormally high price to the 
smallest consumer, 67% higher than the price to consumer lb. 
The extremely complex price structures at the German locations make it difficult 
to sum up the situation as regards electricity prices to industrial users. Prices in 
Hamburg are amongst the highest in the Community, behind only Portugal and 
Spain (from Ie upwards). By contrast, prices are close to the Community average 
in the Western Zone and in the Southern Zone, particularly for categories Ie, Id 
and If. Compared with other locations in the Community, prices in Germany 
range between the Community average and the highest prices. 
One point to note is that all the prices in the new Lander lie between the 
maximum and minimum prices in the old Lander, a sign of satisfactory integration 
of the tariffs. In Leipzig and Rostock, for example, prices to categories Ig, Ih and 
Ii are amongst the most moderate. 
6.3. Incidence of indirect taxation 
Since in most cases indirect taxes are deductible by industry, their impact was 
considered negligible and the study was restricted solely to the prices net of all 
taxes based on application of the tariffs and contracts. 
7. Analysis of electricity prices to industrial users in the Community 
The tables in Annex 5 show the price trends for the 14 locations in the sample. 
As no comparison is made, the prices could be expressed in national currency. 
The objective is to compare the situation before and after the Directive. The dates 
of 1 January 1985, 1990 and 1995 were chosen, as ten years was considered long 
enough to show the long-term trend. The tables also include the consumer price 
indices (CPI) and GDP index. The consumer price indices are the monthly values 
on 1 January each year. The GDP index is an annual value, calculated on the 
basis that 1985=100. Comparison of the price trends with the consumer price 
index gives an indication of the productivity gains or losses in the electricity 
industry. The ratio between the maximum and minimum prices at each location 
in turn allows assessment of how the tariff burden is spread between consumers. 
7.1. Electricity price situation and trends by location in national currency on 
1 January 1985. 1990 and 1995 
As a result of the Directive, progress has been made with improving the 
transparency of electricity prices, since the number of locations has increased and, 
for the first time, full data are available for at least one location in each Member 
State. In contrast to gas, the falling world market prices for primary energy 
15 
sources have exerted no downward pressure on electricity prices. This is one 
factor which must be borne in mind when assessing productivity trends. 
(a) Productivity 
A rough estimate of the productivity improvements in the electricity sector can 
be obtained by comparing electricity price and CPI trends. If prices are rising 
slower than the CPI it can be assumed that progress has been made. In practice, 
a general improvement can be observed, except in Hamburg and Spain where the 
relative deterioration in prices could be due to a deterioration in the cost structure 
and in Italy where, by contrast, the price increases reflect a drive towards truer 
pricing with a view to privatization. In Portugal, Greece and, to a lesser extent, 
the United Kingdom, where inflation was high, the price increases were well 
below the increase in the CPI. At the low-inflation locations, the biggest 
productivity improvements were in Denmark, Ireland, the Netherlands and 
Luxembourg. Moderate progress was made in Belgium, the Western Zone of 
Germany and France. 
This progress stems partly from passing on the reductions in the cost of primary 
energy supplies in the tariffs and partly from the introduction of new generation 
technologies (gas/steam turbines) or of improved business management techniques 
(integrated resources management). Finally, some of the national electricity 
industries have been liberalized and had to be restructured to make them more 
competitive. 
(b) Degressivity 
The interval between Ii and la (the minimum and maximum prices at each 
location in the sample) provides a measure of degressivity. If the factor is very 
high, the tariff is highly degressive and it can be assumed that the costs are not 
shared evenly between consumer categories but to the advantage of big 
consumers. On 1 January 1995 this was the case in Italy (coefficient of 3.36), 
Belgium (3.25), Luxembourg (3.21) and Ireland (2.77). Conversely, a coefficient 
below the average for the sample is a sign of a tariff particularly favourable to 
small consumers, as in London (1.88) and Rotterdam (1.90). At all the other 
locations, this coefficient is slightly over 2: Spain (2.12), Greece (2.14), Portugal 
(2.18), Paris (2.22), Hamburg (2.27) and Western Zone of Germany (2.46). Prices 
in Denmark, with a coefficient of 1.26, stand out amongst all the others, not only 
because they are the lowest but also because of the gentle price curve which, in 
turn, suggests that the position is very different from at the other locations. 
Whether upward or downward, the price movements between 1985 and 1995 
favoured the biggest consumers, above all in Belgium, Ireland, Luxembourg and, 
even more so, Italy. By contrast, the increases were shared more evenly between 
all consumers in Hamburg, the Western Zone of Germany, Greece, Spain and 
Portugal and tended to favour small industrial consumers in Denmark and France. 
In the Netherlands, restructuring hit small consumers during the first period, but 
this was corrected during the second. In London, restructuring of the tariff put 
an end to one anomaly in the degressive scale and restored the differentials 
between la, lb and Ic to normal proportions. 
16 
7.2. Price situation and trends bv location in PPS 
Annexes 6 and 7 provide an overview of electricity prices (net of all taxes) to 
industrial users in the Community on 1 January 1995 and 1 January 1990, 
expressed in PPS. These tables allow comparisons between different locations. 
In both 1995 and 1990 Danish consumers paid the lowest PPS prices in the 
sample and Portuguese consumers the highest. These countries clearly mark the 
two opposite ends of the scale, with all the other prices therefore between the two. 
The first conclusion is that price trends between 1990 and 1995 differed far more 
in terms of purchasing power than of monetary parity, although they remained 
within moderate limits, with one or two exceptions. These were in North Brabant 
(with an increase of 30.7% for Ic and a reduction of 19.4% for la), followed by 
Rotterdam (25% reduction for lb) and Italy (19.0% increase for la). All the other 
price movements observed were smaller. The analysis ends at Ig since no data 
were available for Ih and Ii in January 1990. 
Compared with 1 January 1990, on 1 January 1995 moderate increases or 
. reductions were observed at every location, with the average trend for the entire 
sample downward, matching the trend in national currency. Increases of around 
10% or lower were recorded in Belgium, France, Ireland, Italy, Portugal and 
Hamburg. Reductions on the same scale were observed in the Western Zone of 
Germany, Greece, Luxembourg and London (the data for the other locations in the 
United Kingdom were incomplete). There were ups and downs in Denmark, with 
the prices falling up to Id and increasing from Ie on. In Spain, the opposite was 
observed, with increases for la and lb and small reductions for the others. 
Finally, in the Netherlands restructuring of the tariffs brought big reductions or 
increases for all consumers as costs were transferred from one category to another. 
At every location the PPS prices followed the same curve as the prices in national 
currency, except in Denmark, where they showed transfers of costs between 
consumers, in Greece, where they reflected a relative fall in the PPS prices and 
Ireland where prices held steady in national currency but rose in PPS, showing 
that they had become higher in terms of purchasing power. 
Price rises over the report period generally remained below inflation, with 
numerous examples of restructuring of the tariffs reflecting the concern to adjust 
prices to the demand profile. 
At many locations, electricity prices were widely scattered in the case of small 
consumers but converged towards the same low-price range as consumption 
increased. This could suggest that producers set their tariffs to keep prices to big 
consumers close to the prices charged by their immediate neighbours. 
7.2.1. Ranking of locations 
In Annexes 8 and 9 the horizontal line cutting the table in two represents the 
median, the theoretical value above and below which an equal number of 
observations fall. This provides a means of measuring any convergence of prices, 
by calculating the gap between the prices at each location and the median. These 
tables display the relative position of each location in increasing order of price on 
17 
1 January 1990 and 1 January 1995. They also reveal far-reaching differences in 
price structures from one location to another in the sample. 
Ranking the locations by frequency of appearance in each position, Denmark, 
North Brabant, France and Rotterdam, in that order, can be considered the 
cheapest locations in the sample, followed by Greece, the Western Zone of 
Germany and the United Kingdom (for small industrial consumers), Ireland (for 
moderate consumers) and Belgium and Luxembourg (for the biggest consumers). 
The most costly locations for all consumers are Hamburg and Portugal, joined, for 
moderate and big industrial consumers, by Spain. 
7.2.2. Changes in ranking between 1990 and 1995 
Comparison of Annexes 8 and 9 shows the changes in ranking of the individual 
locations on the relevant dates. Denmark (ranked first) and Portugal (last) still 
hold the same position for all their typical consumers. Amongst the low-cost 
locations, France, Rotterdam and North Brabant all showed minor changes. 
Luxembourg and the Western Zone of Germany fell significantly. Luxembourg 
has even become the location with the lowest prices, after Denmark, for big 
consumers. The United Kingdom (London) and Greece have both improved their 
relative positions. As for the high-cost locations (i.e. the locations above the 
median), Belgium's position deteriorated in the case of small and moderate 
consumers. Spain and Italy's position deteriorated for all consumers, except 
category Ic in Spain. In Ireland, no significant changes were reported. Finally, 
prices in Hamburg drew closer to those charged in Spain. 
7.2.3. Electricity prices in ECU 
The ECU tables in Annex 10 are for information only. They made it possible to 
plot the price difference graphs for the various units on pp. 45 and 46. * 
7.2.4. Convergence 
To determine whether prices converged between 1990 and 1995, the number of 
observations within an interval of 10% and 25% on either side of the median for 
the sample was determined in January 1990 and January 1995, i.e." before and 
after the Directive entered into force. 
TABLED 
OBSERVATIONS 
within intervals of 10% and 25% on either side of the median 
(January 1995/January 1990) 
la lb Ic Id Ie If Ig Ih Ii 
MEDIAN 01/95 1250 1255 1031 840 714 685 576 56? 4U 
+-10% 2 3 7 8 7 68 6 5 
+-25% 11 11 11 10 10 10 11 10 10 
18 
MEDIAN 01/90 12% 1252 1065 827 726 682 577 
+-10% 7 9 8 8 7 5 6 
+-25% 8 10 12 11 11 11 11 
Over the report period, the scatter increased only for small consumers (up to If) 
and the trend reversed from Ig on. This is confirmed by the variations in 
Pearson's coefficient of variability (standard deviation x 100 divided by the 
arithmetic mean) which rose from 25.87% in 1990 to 27.76% in 1995 for If 
(wider scatter) but, conversely, fell from 28.26% to 25.59% for Ig (narrower 
scatter) over the same period. 
This is confirmed by the variations in the standard deviation (square root of the 
variance = s), which rose from 179 for If in 1990 to 191.5 in 1995 but, 
conversely, fell from 167 in 1990 to 151 in 1995 in the case of Ig. It is impossible 
to compare these coefficients for the largest consumers in the sample since no 
figures are available for Ih and Ii in 1990. However, these figures are known for 
1995, when the standard deviation and coefficient of variability were 147 and 
25.48% respectively for Ih and 132 and 25.68% for Ii. These percentages are of 
the same order as for Ig. There are therefore strong reasons to presume that the 
findings for Ig also apply to Ih and Ii and that prices have converged for all big 
consumers. 
8. Analysis of gas prices to industrial users in the Community 
The same method will be used to analyse gas prices. As in the case of electricity, 
the prices are based on direct application of the tariffs and contracts. Fourteen of 
the 34 locations covered by the survey were selected, based on similar criteria to 
ensure a representative subsample. It must be made clear from the outset that gas 
prices are noticeably less transparent than electricity prices, particularly in the case 
of the biggest consumers. 
8.1 Gas price situation and trends bv location in national currency on 1 January 1985. 
1990 and 1995 
The tables in Annex 11 show the sharp deterioration in the transparency of gas 
prices to industrial users in January 1995 (except in the case of Weser-Ems and 
the Netherlands). In contrast to electricity prices, there are numerous blanks 
amongst the prices charged to the biggest consumers, either because no consumers 
were surveyed in these categories or because there were fewer than three. 
Nevertheless, there has been a marked deterioration in transparency, since seven 
prices were reported in January 1990 for 15 but just two in January 1995, despite 
the greater penetration by gas over this period. Geographically, price transparency 
is improving in Germany. As regards price trends, the repercussions of falling 
world gas prices on prices to end-users vary from one location to another. Finally, 
at many locations the price scale has become more degressive, to the benefit of 
large-scale industry. 
Over the first period (from January 1985 to January 1990) there was generally a 
big reduction, both in the gas-producing and gas-importing Member States. From 
1990 to 1995 the situation was more varied. The reductions continued at many 
19 
locations, albeit at a slower rate, but a few increases were observed, principally 
for the smallest standard industrial consumers whose prices seem to be directly 
influenced by the increase in the CPI. The situation over the entire period was 
marked by a general consolidation of the reductions. 
At most locations, the price scale became markedly more degressive between 
January 1990 and 1995 in favour of the biggest standard consumers in the sample, 
often by substantial proportions, with the notable exception of London. There has 
been extensive restructuring of the tariffs at the expense of small and 
medium-si zed industrial undertakings, which indicates strong pressure exerted by 
competition on the internal market on the biggest consumers, who demand and 
obtain the most competitive gas prices. Competition from other energy sources 
plays an extremely important role for large offtakes in the gas sector but virtually 
no role at all for small and medium-sized industrial users who bear the full burden 
of the tariff restructuring in response to falling oil and oil-product prices. 
8.2 Price situation and trends by location in PPS 
Annexes 12 and 13 show the situation as regards PPS gas prices, net of all taxes, 
to industrial users on 1 January 1995 and 1 January 1990 respectively, based on 
direct application of the tariffs and terms of sale. The unit used in the case of gas 
is 100 GJ. 
Prices are lowest in Denmark and the Western Zone of Germany up to standard 
consumer 13-1 and in France from 13-2 on (15 not communicated). Prices are 
highest in Spain up to 13-2 and in Berlin from 13-1 to 14-2 (15 not communicated). 
Prices in the Netherlands lie in between. Only two (identical) prices are available 
for 15, from the Netherlands and Weser-Ems, both gas-producing regions. These 
prices are extremely favourable, compared with the 11 submitted for 14-2. 
As regards the tariff structure, at every location the switch from 12 to 13-1 
(identical offtake but better load factor) attracts a significant price reduction, 
except in Berlin and Luxembourg, where there is no significant difference. By 
contrast, the improvement in consumption conditions between 13-1 and 13-2 or 
between 14-1 and 14-2 (same offtake but better load factor) attracts only a small 
price cut or no change at all at most locations, except in Belgium"; France, Italy 
and the United Kingdom. 
Compared with January 1990, the 1995 PPS prices were slightly lower in the 
United Kingdom, Luxembourg, Strasbourg and in Belgium but higher in Ireland 
and Turin. Changes to the tariff base in favour of big industry were observed in 
Weser-Ems, Paris, Spain and the Netherlands. In Naples, similar changes were 
made in favour of small industrial consumers. No comparison was possible for 
Denmark, Berlin, Hanover and Birmingham for lack of data. In some cases, this 
was because no correlation with the past was established, in others because the 
Directive is not fully applied. 
Compared with the Community sample as a whole, Germany is at both ends of 
the scale, with Weser-Ems sharing the lowest prices with Denmark and Paris, but 
the Berlin sample sharing the highest prices with Spain. Consequently, the price 
20 
scatter in Germany is wider for gas than for electricity, with the locations with the 
lowest gas prices comparable to the cheapest locations in the European Union. 
Still in Germany, the interval between the highest price (DM 1306 in Dusseldorf) 
and the lowest (DM 584 in Weser-Ems) was slightly over 2 in 1990 but rose to 
3.46 in 1995 between Berlin (on DM 1497) and Dortmund/Dusseldorf (DM 433). 
The tables in Annex 14 compare DM gas prices at 10 locations in Germany on 
1 January 1990 and 1 January 1995. 
8 2.1 Ranking of locations on 1 January 1995 
Without exception, and irrespective of the fact that the locations chosen are not 
always the same for the two sources, the relative ranking of the locations is not 
the same for both gas and electricity prices Locations with high gas prices 
sometimes have low electricity prices and vice-versa (see Annexes 15 and 16), 
which suggests that the two sources are not in competition. Comparison of the 
tables in Annexes 15 and 16 shows the changes in the ranking of the sample 
between 1990 and 1995. The following countries, in order, had prices below the 
median everywhere in 1995: Denmark (no data in 1990), Weser-Ems (no 
significant change in comparison with 1990), Birmingham (no data in 1990), Paris 
and the Netherlands (which lost ground in categories II and 12 but consolidated 
their strong position from 13-1 on). The following were above the median 
everywhere: Spain, Naples and Berlin (except in the case of 12), Turin (except 
from 14-1 on) and Ireland (except for 13-1). Luxembourg and London maintained 
the same pattern in 1995, amongst the lowest gas prices for II and 12 but well 
above the median from 13-1 on. Belgium aligned its prices on the median, clearly 
in 1990, but far less so in 1995. Transparency has deteriorated since 1990. It is 
inadequate for the biggest gas consumers, as can be seen from the lack of data 
from many locations. This limits the scope for comparisons. 
The most striking features are as follows: Denmark, the Weser-Ems region and 
the Netherlands are the leading contenders for the lowest prices for all consumers 
combined. They are joined by London and Birmingham in the case of small 
industrial consumers. Both these locations are close to the production sites, which 
is an indication that the comparative advantages have been passed on satisfactorily 
in the price of the end-product. Ireland, however, is an exception and has very 
high prices despite having its own resources. France (Paris) is close to the 
median for II and 12 and the cheapest location in the sample in 1995 from 13-2 
on, despite the fact that it has no substantial resources of its own and is a leading 
importer. Strasbourg, with its autonomous arrangements, is far worse placed than 
the rest of the country. Of the other importing locations, Belgium and 
Luxembourg are clearly below the median for II and 12, are amongst the most 
expensive locations in the sample for 13-1 but return close to the median again for 
large offtakes. Berlin is close to the median for II and 12 but then becomes the 
most expensive location in the entire sample from 13-1 on. Spain has the highest 
prices for II and 12, followed by Ireland and the Italian locations. It is also 
amongst the most expensive locations from 13-1 on. 
8.2.2 Gas prices in ECU 
21 
As in the case of electricity, the ECU gas prices in Annex 17 made it possible to 
plot the graphs comparing ECU and PPS prices (see pp. 47 and 48) and to show 
the differences between the two modes used. 
8.2.3 Convergence 
The number of observations within intervals of 10% and 25% on either side of the 
median was higher everywhere in January 1995 than in January 1990 except in 
the case of II, where the scatter widened in response to the numerous price 
increases in this category. The increase in the number of observations indicates 
a clear convergence of gas prices in the Community. 
TABLE 
OBSERVATIONS 
within intervals of 10% and 25% on either side of the median 
(January 1995/January 1990) 
11 12 13-1 13-2 14-1 14-2 15 
MEDIAN Of/189S 575 471 377 351 340 321 
+-10% 2 6 8 10 7 5 
+-25% 8 10 11 13 9 10 
Comparison of the coefficients of variability (see definition on p. 19) between 1990 and 
1995 for the standard consumers for which full series are available confirms this. 
Although the variability rose from 32.8% to 42% for II, it fell considerably for the 
following three standard consumers: 
- from 27.5% to 17.5% for 12, 
- from 22% to 12.6% for 13-1, 
- from 24.3% to 13% for 13-2. 
Beyond 13-2, the data are incomplete, which makes measurements of this type impossible. 
The perfect symmetry from II to 13-1 between the concentration of the observations 
around the median on the one hand combined with the reduction in the coefficients of 
variability on the other suggest that the same symmetry should extend to the consumer 
categories above 13-1 and tends to confirm that the average reduction in gas prices in the 
European Union has been accompanied by greater convergence. This Is possible, even 
though gas is a closed market protected against gas-gas competition by exclusive rights, 
since this market is nevertheless open to "oblique" competition from neighbouring 
markets. 
22 
ANNEX 1 
COUNCIL DIRECTIVE 90/377/EEC OF 29 JUNE 1990 
INCORPORATION INTO NATIONAL LEGISLATION 
Member State 
A 
B 
D 
DK 
E1 
FIN 
F 
G2 
IRLS 
1 
LUX4 
NL 
P 
Ss 
UK Type of Act 
Federal law 
Ministerial Decree published in Moniteur Belge 
Agreement signed. Details published In the 
Bundesanzeiger 
Decree issued by Energy Ministry 
Not yet fully incorporated 
Agreement reached between the INS and the parties 
concerned 
Law published in the Journal Officiel de la République 
Law published in Efimeris tes Guverneseus 
(Existing provisions) 
Law published in the Gazette Ufficiale 
(Existing provisions) 
Agreement signed between Ministry of Economic 
Affairs and relevant parties 
Ministerial Decree published in Diario da Republica 
? 
Energy Act of 1976 Date of adoption 
-
18-05-92 
08-07-93 
16-03-92 
-
19-07-93 
25-07-91 
-
20-02-92 
-
-. 
30-05-92 
? 
-Date of 
publication 
04-12-92 
18-05-92 
30-07-93 
16-03-92 
-
20-07-93 
25-07-91 
-
20-02-92 
-
-
30-05-92 
7 
-Date of 
notifcation 
04-03-94 
28-09-92 
17-09-93 
01-04-92 
09-02-94 
05-10-94 
09-08-91 
-
26-03-92 
-
25-05-92 
10-06-92 
? 
-Date of entry into force 
01-01-95 
18-05-92 
08-07-93 
16-03-93 
01-01-95 
20-07-93 
25-07-91 
01-07-91 
20-02-92 
01-07-91 
01-01-92 
30-05-92 
? 
01-07-91 
see footnotes on next page. 
23 
1. In Spain an Order published in the Boletfn Oficial del Estado on 31 May 1995 implemented the part of the Directive concerning electricity prices, 
but the Commission has yet to be notified of the general regulation on the transparency of gas prices. This gap in the legislation has not 
prevented regular submission of full data by the Spanish administration. 
2. Greece has implemented only the part of the Directive relating to electricity. In line with paragraph 2 of Article 9 and with Annex 1 to the Directive, 
Greece is exempted from the provisions on natural gas which is not yet available nationwide. ' 
3. Only administrative measures were deemed necessary in view of the laws and other provisions already adopted. The Commission accepted this solution 
in an exchange of letters. 
4. The provisions of the existing Act were deemed sufficient to implement the Directive, i.e. to incorporate it into national law. 
5. Contacts have been established with the Swedish administration to verify whether the Directive has been incorporated and why the Commission has 
not been notified. 
24 
ANNEX 2 
Typical industrial electricity consumers: 
Reference consumer 
la 
lb 
Ic 
Id 
Ie 
If 
ig 
Ih 
Ii Annual consumption (in kWh) 
30 000 
50 000 
160 000 
1 250 000 
2 000 000 
10 000 000 
24 000 000 
50 000 000 
70 000 000 Maximum demand (in kWh) 
30 
50 
100 
500 
500 
2 500 
4 000 
10 000 
10 000 Annual utilisation (in hours) 
1 000 i 
1 000 
1 600 
2 500 
4 000 
4 000 
6 000 
5 000 
7 000 
Typical industrial gas consumers: 
Reference consumer Annual consumption (in GJ) Load factor 
II 418.60 (or 116 300 KWh) No load factor laid down* 
12 4 186.00 (or 1 163 000 KWh) 200 days -
13-1 41 860.00 (or 11.63 GWh) 200 days 1 600 hours 
13-2 .41 860.00 (or 11.63 GWh) 250 days 4 000 hours 
14-1 ' 418 600.00 (or 116.3 GWh) 250 days 4 000 hours 
14-2 418 600.00 (or 116.3 GWh) 330 days 8 000 hours 
15 4 186 000.00 (or 1 163 GWh) 330 days 8 000 hours 
'If necessary 115 - 200 days 
25 
ANNEX. 3 
ISSUES OF "STATISTICS IN FOCUS' 
PUBLISHED TO DATE 
1993 No 19 Electricity prices (domestic) -1 January 1993 
No 20 Gas prices (domestic) -1 January 1993 
1994 No 1 Electricity prices (industry) -1 July 1993 
No 2 Gas prices (industry) - 1 July 1993 
No 3 Electricity prices (domestic) - 1 July 1993 
No 4 Gas prices (domestic) - 1 July 1993 
No 13 Pricing systems (electricity) 
No 14 Pricing systems (gas) 
No 19 Gas prices (domestic) -1 January 1994 
No 20 Electricity prices (domestic) -1 January 1994 
No 21 Electricity prices (industry) -1 January 1994 
No 22 Gas prices (industry) -1 January 1994 
No 33 Electricity prices for industry in the EU -1 July 1994 
No 35 Gas prices for industry in the EU -1 July 1994 
1995 No 8 Electricity prices for industry -1 January 1995 
No 9 Gas prices for industry in the EU -1 January 1995 
No 13 Gas prices (domestic) -1 January 1995 
No 14 Electricity prices (domestic) -1 January 1995 
YEARBOOKS ON ENERGY PRICES 
Gaspreise - Gas prices - Prix du gaz 1990 -1994 
Elektrizitätspreise - Electricity prices - Prix de l'électricité 1985 - 1993 
Gaspreise - Gas prices - Prix du gaz 1985 -1993 
Elektrizitätspreise - Electricity prices - Prix de l'électricité 1990 -1994 
Gaspreise - Gas prices - Prix du gaz 1990 -1994 
Energiepreise - Energy prices - Prix de l'énergie 1973 -1993 
Energiepreise - Energy prices - Prix de l'énergie 1973 -1994 
Elektrizätspreise - Electricity prices - Prix de l'électricité 1990 -1995 
Gaspreise - Gas prices - Prix du gaz 1990-1995 
26 
ANNEX 4 
ELECTRICITY PRICES 5NET OF TAX) TO INDUSTRIAL USERS IN GERMANY 
(in DM/100 MWh/year) 
27 01/01/95 ELECTRICITY PRICES (NET OF TAX) TO INDUSTRIAL USERS IN GERMANY 
DM/10 MWh/Year la lb Ic Id le If Ig Ih II 
DOsseldorf 6036 3020 2681 2144 1896 1760 1402 1635 1276 
Hamburg 3548 3548 3020 2423 1943 1943 1627 1765 1622 
Hannover 3364 3316 2602 2169 1824 1606 1517 1588 1408 
W.Geblet 2768 2768 2436 2012 1777 1627 1259 1366 1123 
Frankfurt 4198 4169 ' 2631 2200 1789 1718 1481 1660 1401 
Stuttgart 3726 3632 2798 2263 1861 1780 1481 1634 1334 
MOnchen 3891 3846 2609 2008 1645 1613 1416 1478 1364 
S.Geblet 3442 3400 2957 1932 1626 1579 1384 1418 1304 
Erfurt 3697 3565 2767 2064 1748 1746 1601 1596 1425 
Leipzig 2939 2884 2702 2187 1846 1693 1364 1466 1243 
Rostock 3700 3700 3348 2174 1770 1770 1503 1431 1234 
01/01/90 ELECTRICITY PRICES (NET OF TAX) TO INDUSTRIAL USERS IN GERMANY 
DM/10 MWh/Year la lb Ic Id le If Ig Ih li 
DOsseldorf NA NA 2582 2066 1837 1701 1358 NA NA 
Hamburg NA NA 2833 2326 1858 1858 1550 NA NA 
Hannover NA NA 2412 2013 1700 1686 1417 ' NA NA 
W.Geblet 2976 2882 2694 2086 1863 1713 1334 NA NA 
Frankfurt NA NA 2626 1996 1632 1661 1349 NA NA 
Stuttgart 3474 3474 2749 2247 1867 1779 1480 NA NA 
MOnchen 3235 3235 2477 2004 1643 1613 1416 NA NA 
S.Geblet NA NA 2406 1924 1620 1577 1383 NA NA 
Erfurt NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 
Leipzig NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 
Rostock NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 
ANNEX S 
ELECTRICITY PRICE SITUATION AND TRENDS BY LOCATION IN NATIONAL CURRENCY 
ON 1 JANUARY 1986,1990 and 1996 
Electricity prices net of tax to industrial users 
Belgium (B) in BFR/100 KWh/Yea 
Year 
1985 
1990 
1995 I.P.C. 
97.7 
109.2 
124 P.I.B. 
(100) 
116.6 
(131) la 
504 
550 
581 lb 
502 
542 
575 Ic 
457 
452 
476 Id 
368 
346 
359 
Denmark (DK) 
Year 
1985 
1990 
1995 I.P.C. 
98 
119.5 
132 P.I.B. 
(100) 
121 
(131) la 
4249 
4720 
3656 lb 
4196 
4662 
3597 Ic 
4007 
4452 
3496 Id 
3842 
4273 
3264 Ie 
328 
296 
304 
Ie 
3330 
3743 
3240 If 
307 
283 
288 ig 
264 
245 
236 Ih 
NA 
NA 
209 Ii 
NA 
NA 
179 
inDKR/100KWh/Year 
If 
3527 
3720 
3169 ig 
3094 
3445 
3029 Ih 
3272 
3561 
2962 Ii 
2935 
3316 
2907 
Hamburg (D) in DM/100 KWh/Year 
Year 
1985 
1990 
1995 I.P.C. 
99.3 
105.8 
125 P.I.B. 
(100) 
112.7 
(132) la 
NA 
NA 
3548 lb 
NA 
NA 
3548 Ic 
3187 
2833. 
3020 Id 
2242 
2326 
2423 Ie 
1800 
1858 
1943 If 
1800 
1858 
1943 ig 
NA 
1550 
1627 Ih 
NA 
NA 
1755 Ii 
NA 
NA 
1522 
28 
1 Western Zone (D) in DM/100 KWh/Year 
| Year 
1985 
1990 
| 1995 I.P.C 
99.3 
105.8 
125 P.I.B. 
(100) 
112.7 
(132) la 
2748 
2975 
2768 lb 
2658 
2882 
2768 Ic 
2379 
2594 
2436 Id 
1887 
2086 
2012 Ie 
1674 
1863 
1777 If 
1530 
1713 
1627 ig 
1193 
1334 
1259 Ih 
NA 
NA 
1366 Ii 
NA 
NA 
1123 
J Athens(GR) in DR/100 KWh/Year 
j Year 
| 1985 
| 1990 
| 1995 I.P.C. 
92.5 
201.3 
410 P.I.B. 
(100) 
211 
(359) (a 
1088 
1740 
2467 lb 
1084 
1735 
2467 Ic 
1002 
1603 
2278 Id 
832 
1330 
1813 Ie 
775 
1239 
1678 If 
775 
1239 
1678 ig 
657 
1049 
1426 Ih 
NA 
NA 
1307 Ii 
NA 
NA 
1155 
j Madrid (E) in PTA/100 KWh/Yea 
j Year 
|985 
1990 
1995 I.P.C. 
97 
133.2 
172 P.I.B. 
(100) 
142.8 
(178) la 
1143 
1588 
1934 lb 
1002 
1588 
1934 ic 
941 
1339 
1465 Id 
869 
1229 
1347 Ie 
781 
1094 
1203 If 
741 
1026 
1127 ig 
669 
934 
Î014 Ih 
NA 
NA 
1016 Ii 
NA 
NA 
911 
Paris (F) in FF/100 KWh/Year 
Year 
1985 
1990 
1995 I.P.C 
97.4 
114.7 
128 P.I.B. 
(100) 
119.4 
(134) la 
7807 
6465 
6673 lb 
7089 
6465 
6673 Ic 
4708 
5930 
6156 Id 
4708 
4947 
5089 Ie 
3860 
4033 
4275 If 
3860 
4033 
4275 ig 
3210 
3436 
3688 Ih 
NA 
NA 
3345 Ii 
NA 
NA 
3001 
29 
Dublin (IRL) in IRL/100 KWh/Year 
Year 
1985 
1990 
1995 I.P.C. 
98.3 
116.7 
130 P.I.B. 
(100) 
114.8 
(126) la 
1063 
1015 
1015 lb 
1063 
1001 
1001 Ic 
879 
804 
804 Id 
693 
614 
614 Ie 
610 
501 
501 If 
593 
469 
469 ig 
536 
403 
403 Ih 
NA 
NA 
404 Ii 
NA 
NA 
367 
Italy (I) in LIT/100 KWh/Year 
Year 
1985 
1990 
1995 I.P.C. 
96.1 
128.2 
163 P.I.B. 
(100) 
139 
(171) la 
23073 
20873 
27320 lb 
21054 
19049 
21980 Ic 
16891 
14886 
17192 Id 
14417 
12412 
15442 Ie 
12356 
11166 
12671 If 
12410 
10893 
12671 ig 
9168 
8029 
10323 Ih 
NA 
NA 
9694 Ii 
NA 
NA 
8134 
30 
Luxemburg (L) in L F R/100 KWh/Year 
Year 
1985 
1990 
1995 I.P.C. 
97.8 
108 
124 P.I.B. 
(100) 
117 
(132) la 
545 
582 
556 lb 
542 
583 
563 ic 
422 
450 
433 Id 
346 
368 
353 Ie 
296 
313 
300 If 
275 
242 
230 ig 
225 
206 
189 ' Ih 
NA 
NA 
196 Ii 
NA 
NA 
173 
Rotterdam (NL) in HFL/100 KWh/Year 
Year 
1985 
1990 
1995 I.P.C. 
98.6 
102.5 
119 P.I.B. 
(100) 
104 
(117) la 
3125 
NA 
2177 lb 
3003 
2950 
2182 Ic 
2536 
2168 
2401 Id 
2361 
1815 
1874 Ie 
2187 
1521 
1491 If 
2025 
1411 
1294 ig 
1720 
1122 
1053 Ih 
NA 
NA 
1118 Ii 
< NA 
NA 
991 
Lisbon (P) in ESC/100 KWh/Year 
Year 
1985 
1990 
1995 I.P.C. 
93.9 
160.7 
237 P.I.B. 
(100) 
192 
(288) la 
1511 
1943 
2408 lb 
1373 
1948 
2499 Ic 
1156 
1613 
2057 Id 
1017 
1398 
1764 Ie 
925 
1253 
1568 If 
925 
1255 
1568 ig 
856 
1149 
1284 Ih 
NA 
NA 
1197 Ii 
NA 
NA 
1105 
London (UK) in UKL/100 KWh/Year 
Year 
1985 
1990 
1995 I.P.C. 
96.4 
126.3 
154 P.I.B. 
(100) 
131.1 
(157) la 
631 
650 
753 lb 
623 
637 
735 Ic 
580 
701 
615 Id 
454 
529 
534 Ie 
396 
462 
473 If 
395 
460 
449 ig 
NA 
413 
414 Ih 
NA 
. NA 
428 Ii 
NA 
NA 
401 
31 
ANNEX 6 
EUR12: ELECTRICITY PRICES (NET OF TAXES) TO INDUSTRIAL USERS 
(in PPS/10 MWh on 1/01/1996) 
Electricity prices net of tax to industrial users on 1/1/1995 
Belgium(B) 
Denmark(DK) 
Western Zone(D) 
Hamburg(D) 
Athens(GR) 
MadridÇE) 
Paris(F) 
DubUnflRL) 
Itafyfl) 
LuxembourgfL) 
Rotterdam(NL) 
North BrabantfNL) 
Lisbon(P) 
London(UK) la 
1443 
441 
1212 
1553 
1069 
1483 
947 
1422 
1613 
1289 
949 
772 
1807 
1090 1428 
435 
1212 
1553 
1065 
1483 
947 
1403 
1298 
1306 
951 
793 
1875 
1064 Jc 
1182 
424 
1067 
1322 
984 
1124 
873 
1126 
1015 
1005 
1047 
919 
1544 
890 891 
399 
881 
1061 
783 
1033 
722 
860 
912 
819 
817 
587 
1324 
773 là 
755 
397 
778 
851 
725 
923 
607 
702 
748 
625 
650 
495 
1177 
685 -m 
715 
389 
712 
851 
725 
864 
607 
657 
748 
533 
564 
493 
1177 
650 586 
374 
551 
712 
616 
778 
523 
565 
610 
439 
549 
441 
964 
529 Ih 
*519 
367 
598 
768 
564 
779 
475 
566 
572 
455 
488 
455 
898 
620 444 
361 
492 
666 
499 
699 
426 
514 
480 
402 
432 
433 
829 
580 EUR 12 
in PPS/10 
MWhtyr 
Mi 
1.22 
2.46 
2.33 
2.14 
2.12 
2.22 
2.77 
3J6 
3.21 
2.20 
1.78 
2.18 
1.88 
32 
ANNEX 7 
EUR12: ELECTRICITY PRICES (NET OF TAXES) TO INDUSTRIAL USERS 
(in PPS/10 mWh on 1/01/1990) 
Electricity prices net of tax to industrial usert on 1/1/1990 
la lb Ic Id If U m ii EUR 12 in PPS/10 
MWh/yr 
Ia/Ii 
Bdgiam(B) 
Denmark(DK) 
Western ZonefD) 
Hamburg(D) 
Athens(GR) 
MadridfE) 
Parb(F) 
Dublin (IRL) 
Italy (I) 
Luxembnrg(L) 
Rotterdam(NL) 
North BrabantfNL) 
Lisbon(P) 
LondonfUK) 
Glasgow(UK) 1296 
463 
1321 
N.A. 
1148 
1350 
905 
1366 
1357 
1363 
NA. 
958 
1741 
990 
1189 1277 
457 
1280 
N.A. 
1145 
1350 
905 
1348 
1238 
1364 
1266 
921 
1746 
969 
1156 1065 
436 
1152 
1258 
1058 
1138 
830 
1082 
968 
1053 
930 
703 
1445 
1067 
1124 815 
419 
926 
1033 
878 
1045 
693 
827 
807 
861 
779 
575 
1253 
805 
878 697 
367 
827 
825 
818 
930 
565 
675 
726 
732 
653 
488 
1123 
703 
744 667 
365 
761 
825 
818 
872 
565 
631 
708 
567 
605 
486 
1124 
700 
682 577 
338 
592 
688 
692 
794 
481 
543 
522 
482 
481 
427 
030 
628 
602 N.A. 
349 
N.A. 
N.A. 
N.A. 
N.A. 
N.A. 
N.A. 
N.A. 
N.A. 
N.A. 
N.A. 
N.A. 
N.A. 
N.A. NA. 
NA. 
NA. 
NA. 
NA. 
NA. 
NA. 
N.A. 
NA. 
NA. 
NA. 
NA. 
NA. 
NA. 
NA. 2.25 
1.33 
2.23 
1.83 
1.66 
1.70 
1.88 
2.52 
2.60 
2.83 
2.63 
2.24 
1.69 
1.58 
1.98 
33 
ANNEX 8 
RANKING OF LOCATIONS IN INCREASING ORDER OF PRICE 
ON 1 JANUARY 1995 
RAWING OF LOCATIONS IN INCREASING ORDER OF PRICE 1/1M95 
1 
2 
3 
4 
5 
6 
7 
e 
9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 la 
Denmark (DK) 
North Brabant (NL) 
Paris (F) 
Rotterdam (NL) 
Athens (GR) 
London (UK) 
Western Zone (D) 
Luxemburg (L) 
Dublin (IRL) 
Belgium (B) 
Madrid (E) 
Hamburg (D) 
Italy (1) 
Lisbon (P) lb 
Denmark (DK) 
North Brabant (NL) 
Paris (F) 
Rotterdam (NL) 
London (UK) 
Athens (GR) 
Western Zone (D) 
Italy (1) 
Luxembourg (L) 
Dublin (IRL) 
Belgium (B) 
Madrid (E) 
Hamburg (D) 
Lisbon (P) to 
Denmark (DK) 
Paris (F) 
London (UK) 
North Brabant (NL) 
Athens (GR) 
Luxembourg (L) 
Italy") 
Rotterdam (NL) 
Western Zone (D) 
Madrid (E) 
Dublin (IRL) 
Belgium (B) 
Hamburg (D) 
Lisbon (P) id 
Denmark (DK) 
North Brabant (NL) 
Paris (F) 
London (UK) 
Athens (GR) 
Rotterdam (NL) 
Luxembourg (L) 
DubKnflRL) 
Western Zone (D) 
Belgium (B) 
Italy (1) 
Madrid (E) 
Hamburg (D) 
Lisbon (P) la 
Denmark (DK) 
North Brabant (NL) 
Paris (F) 
Luxembourg (L) 
Rotterdam (NL) 
London (UK) 
Dublin (IRL) 
Athens (GR) 
Italy (1) 
Belgium (B) 
Western Zone (D) 
Hamburg (D) 
Madrid (E) 
Lisbon (P) If 
Denmark (DK) 
North Brabant (NL) 
Luxemburg (L) 
Rotterdam (NL) 
Paris (F) 
London (UK) 
Dublin (IRL) 
Western Zone (D) 
Belgium (B) 
Athens (GR) 
Italy (1) 
Hamburg (D) 
Madrid (E) 
Lisbon (P) ta 
Denmark (DK) 
Luxemburg (L) 
North Brabant (NL) 
Paris (F) 
Rotterdam (NL) 
Western Zone (D) 
Dublin (IRL) 
Belgium (B) 
London (UK) 
Italy (1) 
Athens (GR) 
Hamburg (D) 
Madnd(E) 
Lisbon (P) m 
Denmark (DK) 
Luxembourg (L) 
North Brabant (NL) 
Pans (F) 
Rotterdam (NL) 
Belgium (B) 
Athens (GR) 
Dublin (IRL) 
Italy (1) 
Western Zone (D) 
London (UK) 
Hamburg (D) 
Madrid (E) 
Lisbon (P) 11 
Denmark (DK) 
Luxembourg (L) 
Paris (F) 
Rotterdam (NL) 
North Brabant (NL) 
Belgium (B) 
Italy (1) 
Western Zone (D) 
Athens (GR) 
Dublin (IRL) 
London (UK) 
Hamburg (D) 
Madrid (E) 
Lisbon (P) 
34 
ANNEX 9 
RANKING OF LOCATIONS IN INCREASING ORDER OF PRICE 
ON 1 JANUARY 1990 
RANKING OF LOCATIONS IN INCREASING ORDER OF PRICE 1/1/1990 
1 
2 
3 
4 
5 
6 
7 
8 
9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
15 la 
Denmark (DK) 
Paris (F) 
North Brabant (NL) 
London (UK) 
Athens (GR) 
Glasgow (UK) 
Belgium (B) 
Western Zone (D) 
Madrid (E) 
Italy (1) 
Luxembourg (L) 
Dublin (IRL) 
Lisbon (P) lb 
Denmark (DK) 
Paris (F) 
North Brabant (NL) 
London (UK) 
Athens (GR) 
Glasgow (UK) 
Italy (1) 
Rotterdam (NL) 
Belgium (B) 
Western Zone (D) 
Dublin (IRL) 
Madrid (E) 
Luxembourg (L) 
L:sior (P) to 
Denmark (DK) 
North Brabant (NL) 
Paris (F) 
Rotterdam (NL) 
Italy (1) 
Luxembourg (L) 
Athens (GR) 
Belgium (B) 
London (UK) 
Dubttn (IRL) 
Glasgow (UK) 
Madrid (E) 
Western Zone (D) 
Hamburg (D) 
Lisbon (P) Id 
Denmark (DK) 
North Brabant (NL) 
Paris (F) . 
Rotterdam (NL) 
London (UK) 
Italy 0) 
Belgium (B) 
Dublin QRL) 
Luxembourg (L) 
Athens (GR) 
Glasgow (UK) 
Western Zone (D) 
Hamburg (D) 
Madrid (E) 
Usbon(P) le 
Denmark (DK) 
North Brabant (NL) 
Paris (F) 
Rotterdam (NL) 
Dublin (IRL) 
Belgium (B) 
London (UK) 
Italy (1) 
Luxembourg (L) 
Glasgow (UK) 
Athens (GR) 
Hamburg (D) 
Western Zone (D) 
Madrid (E) 
Usbon(P) If 
Denmark (DK) 
North Brabant (NL) 
Paris (F) 
Luxembourg (L) 
Rotterdam (NL) 
Dublin (IRL) 
Belgium (B) 
Glasgow (UK) 
London (UK) 
Italy (1) 
Western Zone (D) 
Athens (GR) 
Hamburg (D) 
Madrid (E) 
Lisbon (P) 10 
Denmark (DK) 
North Brabant (NL) 
Paris (F) 
Rotterdam (NL) 
Luxembourg (L) 
Italy (1) 
Dublin (IRL) 
Belgium (B) 
Western Zone (D) 
Glasgow (UK) 
London (UK) 
Hamburg (D) 
Athens (GR) 
Madnd (E) 
Lisbon (P) Ih 
Denmark (DK) Ii 
35 
ANNEX 10 
ELECTRICITY PRICES IN ECU PER 10 MWh PER YEAR 
(1 January 1985,1990 and 1995) 
Electricity prices in ECU per 10 MWh per year 
la Jan-85 , Jan-90 Jan-95 
Belgium (B) 
Denmark (DK) 
Western Zone (D) 
Hamburg (D) 
Athens (GR) 
Madrid (E) 
Paris (F) 
Dublin (IRL) 
Italy (1) 
Luxemburg (L) 
Rotterdam (NL) 
North Brabant (NL) 
Lisbon (P) 
London (UK) ' 1132 
535 
1237 
0 
1200 
929 
1148 
1489 
1684 
1224 
1244 
778 
1251 
1015 1290 
599 
1464 
0 
915 
1204 
931 
1320 
1378 
1366 
0 
974 
1084 
893 1484 
488 
1456 
1866 
837 
1176 
1015 
1274 
1367 
1419 
1021 
830 
1228 
955 Electricity prices in ECU per 10 MWh per year 
lb Jan-85 Jan-90 Jan-95 
Belgium (B) 
Denmark (DK) 
Western Zone (D) 
Hamburg (D) 
Athens (GR) 
Madrid (E) 
Paris (F) 
Dublin (IRL) 
Italy (I) 
Luxemburg (L) 
Rotterdam (NL) 
North Brabant (NL) 
Lisbon (P) 
London (UK) 1127 
529 
1196 
0 
1196 
815 
1042 
1489 
1537 
1217 
1195 
743 
1137 
1002 1272 
592 
1418 
0 
< 
913 
1204 
931 
1302 
1257 
1367 
1286 
936 
1087 
874 1468 
480 
1456 
1866 
834 
1176 
1015 
1257 
1100 
1438 
1024 
853 
1274 
932 
Electricity prices in ECU per 10 MWh per year 
Ic Jan-85 Jan-90 Jan-95 
Belgium (B) 
Denmark (DK) 
Western Zone(D) 
Hamburg (D) 
Athens (GR) 
Madrid (E) 
Paris (F) 
Dublin (IRL) 
Italy (1) 
Luxemburg (L) 
Rotterdam (NL) 
North Brabant (NL) 
Lisbon (P) 
London (UK) 1026 
505 
1071 
1434 
1105 
765 
692 
1231 
1233 
948 
1009 
1102 
957 
933 1060 
565 
1276 
1394 
843 
1015 
854 
1045 
982 
1056 
945 
715 
900 
962 1215 
467 
1281 
1588 
770 
890 
937 
1008 
860 
1107 
1127 
989 
1049 
780 Electricity prices in ECU per 10 MWh per year 
Id Jan-85 Jan-90 Jan-95 
Belgium (B) 
Denmark (DK) 
Western Zone(D) 
Hamburg (D) 
Athens (GR) 
Madrid (E) 
Paris (F) 
Dublin (IRL) 
Italy (I) 
Luxemburg (L) 
Rotterdam (NL) 
North Bra bant (NL) 
Lisbon (P) 
London (UK) 827 
484 
849 
1009 
918 
706 
692 
971 
1052 
777 
940 
, 613 
842 
731 812 
543 
1026 
1144 
700 
932 
712 
798 
819 
863 
791 
584 
780 
726 917 
436 
1058 
1274 
613 
819 
774 
771 
772 
902 
879 
632 
899 
677 
36 
ANNEX 10 
Electricity prices in ECU per 10 MWh per year 
Ie Jan-85 Jan-90 Jan-95 
Belgium (B) 
Denmark (DK) 
Western Zone (D) 
Hamburg (D) 
Athens (GR) 
Madrid (E) 
Paris (F) 
Dublin (IRL) 
Italy (I) 
Luxemburg (L) 
Rotterdam (NL) 
North Brabant (NL) 
Lisbon (P) 
London (UK) 737 
420 
753 
810 
855 
635 
567 
854 
902 
665 
870 
558 
766 
636 694 
475 
917 
914 
652 
829 
581 
652 
737 
733 
663 
496 
699 
634 776 
433 
935 
1022 
567 
731 
650 
629 
634 
765 
700 
533 
799 
600 Electricity prices in ECU per 10 MWh per year 
If Jan-85 Jan-90 Jan-95 
Belgium (B) 
Denmark (DK) 
Western Zone (D) 
Hamburg (D) 
Athens (GR) 
Madrid (E) 
Paris (F) 
Dublin (IRL) 
Italy (I) 
Luxemburg (L) 
Rotterdam (NL) 
North Brabant (NL) 
Lisbon (P) 
London (UK) 690 
444 
689 
810 
855 
602 
567 
830 
906 
618 
806 
556 
766 
635 664 
472 
843 
914 
652 
778 
581 
609 
719 
569 
615 
494 
700 
631 • 735 
423 
856 
1022 
567 
685 
550 
588 
634 
587 
607 
531 
799 
570 
Electricity prices in ECU per 10 MWh per year 
Ig Jan-85 Jan-90 Jan-95 
Belgium (B) 
Denmark (DK) 
Western Zone (D) 
Hamburg (D) 
Athen (GR) 
Madrid (E) 
Paris (F) 
Dublin (IRL) 
Italy (I) 
Luxemburg (L) 
Rotterdam (NL) 
North Bra bant (NL) 
Lisbon (P) 
London (UK) 593 
390 
537 
0 
725 
544 
472 
750 
669 
505 
685 
675 
709 
0 575 
438 
656 
763 
552 
709 
495 
524 
530 
483 
989 
434 
641 
567 603 
404 
662 
856 
482 
616 
561 
506 
516 
483 
494 
474 
655 
525 
37 
ANNEX 11 
Gas prices (net of tax) to industrial users by location in national currency: 
situation and trends on 1 January 1985,1990 and 1995 —-
Gas prices (net of tax) to industrial users 
Belgium (B) in BFR/100 GJ/Year 
Year 
1985 
19Ö0 
1995 I.P.C. 
97.7 
109,2 
124 P.I.B. 
100 
116.6 
(131) 11 
36840 
24620 
23700 12 
38840 
24620 
23700 13-1 
38840 
24620 
23700 13-2 
36840 
24620 
23700 14-1 
38840 
24620 
23700 I4-2 
36840 
24620 
23700 15 
36840 
24620 
23700 
Denmark (DK) in DKR/100 GJ/Year 
Year 
1985 
1990 
1995 I.P.C. 
98 
119.5 
132 P.I.B. 
100 
121 
(131) 11 
NA 
NA 
3870 12 
NA 
NA 
3650 13-1 
NA 
NA 
2710 13-2 
NA 
NA 
2710 14-1 
NA 
NA 
2370 14-2 
NA 
NA 
2370 15 
NA 
NA 
NA 
Weser-Ems (0) in DM/100 GJ/Year 
Year 
1985 
1990 
1995 IPC. 
99.3 
105,8 
125 P.I.B. 
100 
112,7 
(132) 11 
1438 
638 
978 12 
1394 
794 
875 13-1 
1292 
665 
678 I3-2 
1292 
665 
678 14-1 
1279 
809 
569 14-2 
1237 
609 
569 15 
1228 
584 
517 
Berlin (D) in DM/100 GJ/Year 
Year 
1985 
1990 
1995 I.P.C. 
99.3 
105,8 
125 P.I.B. 
100 
112,7 
(132) 11 
NA 
NA 
1497 12 
NA 
NA 
1072 13-1 
NA 
NA 
1050 I3-2 
NA 
NA 
1050 14-1 
NA 
NA 
900 I4-2 
NA 
NA 
872 IS 
NA 
NA 
NA 
Madrid (E) in PTA/100 GJ/Year 
Year 
1985 
1990 
1995 I.P.C. 
97 
133,2 
172 P.I.B. 
100 
142,8 
(178) 11 
160400 
118400 
190010 12 
153600 
78500 
83020 13-1 
152700 
73800 
52170 I3-2 
152700 
73800 
50250 14-1 
NA 
NA 
46110 I4-2 
NA 
NA 
46110 15 
NA 
NA 
NA 
Paris (F) in FF/100 GJ/Year 
Year 
1985 
1990 
1995 I.P.C. 
97.4 
114.7 
128 P.I.B. 
100 
119,4 
034) 11 
5352 
3796 
3960 12 
4847 
3157 
3337 13-1 
4222 
2298 
2132 I3-2 
4129 
2242 
1945 14-1 
3850 
1975 
1691 I4-2 
3780 
1925 
1640 15 
3753 
1901 
NA 
38 
Dublin (IRL) in IRL/100 GJ/Year | 
Year 
1985 
1990 
1995 I.P.C. 
98.3 
118,7 
130 Pl.B 
100 
114.8 
(126) 11 
630 
380 
549 12 
559 
380 
446 13-1 
NA 
340 
254 I3-2 
NA 
340 
254 14-1 
NA 
175 
NA I4-2 
NA 
175 
NA •I 
NA | 
175 
NA | 
Milano (1) in LIT/100 GJ/Year | 
Year 
1985 
1990 
1995 I.P.C. 
96,1 
128,2 
163 P.I.B. 
100 
139.4 
(171) 11 
1118900 
1163600 
1456300 12 
1084500 
1122400 
1011900 13-1 
1008300 
529500 
855100 I3-2 
984900 
496600 
626500 14-1 
937000 
4S62O0 
575900 I4-2 
914400 
434800 
543800 •I 
862400 
408500 
NA 
Luxemburg (L) in LUF/100 GJ/Year 
Year 
1985 
1990 
1995 I.P.C. 
97,8 
. 106 
124 P.I.B 
100 
116,6 
(132) 11 
32880 
.20003 
19451 12 
32160 
17691 
17610 13-1 
30800 
16991 
17237 I3-2 
28750 
16767 
15149 14-1 
NA 
16603 
15086 I4-2 
NA 
16603 
15066 15 
NA 
NA 
NA 
Rotterdam (NL) in HFL/100 GJ/Year 
Year 
1985 
1990 
1995 I.P.C. 
98,6 
102,5 
119 P.I.B. 
100 
104,4 
(117) 11 
1594 
1140 
1184 12 
1582 
1125 
1162 13-1 
1492 
762 
742 I3-2 
1492 
762 
742 14-1 
1410 
645 
593 I4-2 
1410 
645 
593 15 
1328 
NA 
518 
London (UK) in UKL/100 GJ/Year 
Year 
1985 
1990 
1995 I.P.C. 
98,4 
126,3 
154 P.I.B. 
100 
131.1 
(157) 11 
343 
386 
333 12 
325 
303 
298 13-1 
308 
290 
262 I3-2 
308 
286 
256 14-1 
308 
246 
256 I4-2 
308 
242 
227 15 
271 
156 
NA 
39 
ANNEX 12 
EUR12: GAS PRICES (NET OF TAX) TO INDUSTRIAL USERS IN PPS/100 GJ 
on 01/01/1995 
Gas prices (net of tsx) to industrial users on 1/1/1995 
BELGIUM (B) 
DENMARK(DK) 
WESER-EMS(D) 
BERLIN(D) 
MADRID(E) 
PARIS(F) 
STRASBURG(F) 
DUBLINflRL) 
TURINfT) 
NAPLES(I) 
LUXEMBURG(L) 
ROTTERDAM(NL) 
LONDON(UK) 
BIRMINGHAM(UK) 11 
588 
411 
428 
655 
1454 
562 
650 
769 
753 
1099 
451 
516 
481 
497 12 
461 
387 
383 
469 
637 
473 
571 
625 
598 
598 
408 
507 
432 
428 13-1 
418 
288 
297 
460 
400 
303 
353 
356 
387 
387 
400 
324 
379 
975 .3-2 
342 
288 
297 
460 
385 
276 
334 
356 
370 
370 
351 
324 
373 
351 14-1 
342 
251 
249 
394 
354 
240 
N.A. 
N.A. 
340 
340 
350 
259 
371 
334 14-2 
316 
251 
249 
382 
354 
233 
N.A. 
N.A. 
321 
321 
350 
259 
328 
N.A. 15 
N.A. 
N.A. 
226 
N.A. 
N.A. 
N.A. 
N.A. 
N.A. 
N.A. 
N.A. 
N.A. 
226 
N.A. 
N.A. 11/15 
1.90 
1.60 
1.90 
1.70 
4.10 
2.40 
1.90 
2.10 
2.30 
3.42 
1.30 
1.20 
1.50 
1.50 
•or last known consumer where no 15. 
40 
ANNEX 13 
EUR12: GAS PRICES (NET OF TAX) TO INDUSTRIAL USERS IN PPS/100 G J 
on 01/01/1990 
Gas prices (net of tax) to 
•> 
Belgium(B) 
Hanover(D) 
Weser-Ems(D) 
Madrid(E) 
Paris(F) 
Strasbourg(F) 
Dublin(IRL) 
Turin(l) 
Naples(l) 
Luxembourg(L) 
Rotterdam(NL) 
London(UK) industrial users on 1 /1 /1990 
ft 
580 
672 
372 
1006 
533 
700 
511 
699 
1130 
468 
489 
588 12 
469 
569 
353 
667 
443 
579 
511 
651 
944 
414 
483 
461 t$-1 
421 
• 497 
296 
627 
323 
N.A 
458 
344 
344 
398 
327 
441 /3-2 
352 
492 
296 
627 
315 
346 
458 
323 
323 
393 
327 
435 14-1 
352 
470 
271 
N.A 
277 
N.A 
236 
304 
304 
389 
277 
374 14-2 
329 
272 
271 
N.A 
270 
N.A 
236 
283 
283 
389 
277 
368 /5 
321 
272 
260 
' N.A 
N.A 
N.A 
236 
266 
266 
N.A 
N.A 
237 HM 
1.80 
2.50 
1.40 
1.60 
2.00 
2.00 
2.10 
2.60 
4.20 
1.20 
1.80 
2.50 
41 
ANNEX 14 
GAS PRICES (NET OF TAX) TO INDUSTRIAL USERS IN GERMANY 
on 1 January 1990 and 1995 
42 Gas prices (net of tax) to industrial users on 1/1/95 Germany 
11 12 13-1 13-2 14-1 14-2 15 
Dusseldorf 1350 983 967 919 803 756 433 
Hamburg 1022 1014 861 786 708 NA NA 
Hanover 1289 972 844 836 792 NA NA 
Dortmund 1003 850 822 789 733 703 433 
Frankfurt 1069 983 847 817 781, 753 NA 
Stuttgart 1231 1097 1058 944 875 750 NA 
Munich 1161 1094 1028 836 797 742 456 
Weser-Ems 978 875 678 678 569 569 517 
Dresden 1233 994 892 836 667 NA NA 
Berlin 1497 1072 1050 1050 900 872 NA 
Gas prices (net of tax) to industrial users on 1/1/90 Germany 
11 12 13-1 13-2 14-1 14-2 15 
Dusseldorf 1306 982 967 924 914 772 635 
Hamburg 1103 1103 928 853 834 612 612 
Hanover 1512 1280 1119 1108 1058 612 612 
Dortmund 1028 834 806 773 684 684 621 
Frankfurt 992 939 718 718 714 714 714 
Stuttgart 1075 1103 1181 923 923 834 834 
Munich 1482 1002 1114 1032 864 751 609 
Weser-Ems 838 794 665 665 609 609 584 
Dresden NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 
Berlin NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 
ANNEX 15 
Ranking of locations in increasing order of price on 1 January 1995 
Ranking of locations in increasing order of price 
11 12 13-1 01/01/1995 
13-2 MM 14rZ M 
10 Denmark(DK) 
Weser-Ems(D) 
Luxembourg(L) 
London(UK) 
BirminghamfUK) 
Rotterdam(NL) 
Paris(F) Weser-EmsfD) 
DenmarkfDK) 
Luxembourg(L) 
Birmingham(UK) 
LondonfUK) 
BelgiumfB) 
Bertin(D) DenmarkfDK) 
Weser-EmsfD) 
Paris(F) 
Rotterdam(NL) 
Strasbourg/?) 
DubMnORL) 
Birmingham(UK) Paris(F) 
Denmark(DK) 
Weser-Ems(D) 
Rotterdam(NL) 
StrfisbourgfF) 
Belgium(B) 
Birmingham(UK) 
Belgium(B) 
Strasbourg(F) 
Ber1in(D) 
TurinO) 
Dublin (IRL) 
NaplesO) 
Madrid(E) Paris(F) 
Rotterdam(NL) 
Strasbourg(F) 
TurinO) 
NaplesO) 
DubMnORL) 
Madrid(E) LondonfUK) 
TurinO) 
NaplesO) 
Luxembourg(L) 
MadridfE) 
BelgiumfB) 
BeriinfD) Luxembourg(L) 
Dublin(IRL) 
TurinO) 
NaplesO) 
LondonfUK) 
Madrid(E) 
BeriinfD) ParisfF) ParisfF) Weser-Ems(D) 
Weser-EmsfD) Weser-EmsfD) RotterdamfNL) 
DenmarkfDK) DenmarkfDK) 
RotterdamfNL) RotterdamfNL) 
BirminghamfUK) BelgiumfB) 
TurinO) Turinfl) 
NaplesO) NaplesO) 
s 
BelgiumfB) LondonfUK) 
LuxembourgfL) LuxembourgfL) 
MadridfE) MadridfE) 
LondonfUK) BeriinfD) 
BeriinfD) 
43 
ANNEX 16 
f 
RANKING OF LOCATIONS IN INCREASING ORDER OF PRICE 
on 1 January 1990 
Ranking of locations in increasing older of pike GazOJ/Ol/90 
II. 12 Î3-1 13-2 14-1 14-2 IS 
Weser-EmsfD) Weser-Ems(D) Weser-Ems(D) Weser-EmsfD) Dublin(IRL) DublinflRL) Dublin(IRL) 
LuxembourgfL) LuxembourgfL) ParisfF) ParisfF) Weser-EmsfD) ParisfF) LondonfUK) 
RotterdamfNL) ParisfF) RotterdamfNL) Turinfl) ParisfF) Weser-EmsfD) Weser-EmsfD) 
DublinflRL) LondonfUK) Turinfl) Naplesfl) RotterdamfNL) HanoverfD) Turinfl) 
ParisfF) BelgiumfB) Naplesfl) RotterdamfNL) Turinfl) RotterdamfNL) Naplesfl) 
BelgiumfB) RotterdamfNL) LuxembourgfL) Strasbourg(F) Naplesfl) Turinfl) HanoverfD) 
LondonfUK) DublinflRL) BelgiumfB) BelgiumfB) BelgiumfB) Naplesfl) BelgiumfB) 
HanoverfD) HanoverfD) LondonfUK) LuxembourgfL) LondonfUK) BelgiumfB) 
Turinfl) StrasbourgfF) DublinflRL) LondonfUK) LuxembourgfL) LondonfUK) 
Strasbourg(F) Turinfl) HanoverfD) DublinflRL) HanoverfD) LuxembourgfL) 
MadridfE) MadridfE) MadridfE) HanoverfD) 
Naplesfl) Naplesfl) MadridfE) 
44 
ANNEX 17 
GAS PRICES IN ECU IN 1985 - 1990 - 1995 
Gas prices in ECU/100 GJ/Year 
11 Jan-85 Jan-90 Jan-95 
Belgium(B) 
Denmark(DK) 
Weser-Ems (D) 
Madrid(E) 
Paris(F) 
Strasbourg(F) 
Dublin(IRL) 
Turin(l) 
Naples(l) 
Luxembourg(L) 
Rotterdam(NL) 
London(UK) 827 
NA 
647 
1304 
786 
937 
882 
877 
NA 
738 
634 
551 578 
NA 
412 
897 
548 
720 
494 
710 
1148 
469 
497 
530 605 
517 
514 
1155 
602 
697 
689 
638 
931 
497 
556 
422 Gas prices in ECU/100 GJ/Year 
12 Jan-85 Jan-90 Jan-95 
Belgium(B) 
Denmarfc(DK) 
Weser-Ems(D) 
Madrid(E) 
Paris(F) 
Strasbourg(F) 
Dublin(IRL) 
Turin(l) 
Naples(l) 
Luxembourg(L) 
Rotterdam(NL) 
London(UK) 758 
NA 
627 
1249 
683 
779 
783 
827 
NA 
722 
630 
523 467 
NA 
390 
595 
456 
695 
494 
661 
958 
416 
490 
416 474 
487 
460 
505 
508 
612 
560 
506 
506 
450 
454 
378 
Gas prices in ECU/100 GJ/Year 
13-1 Jan-85 Jan-90 Jan-95 
Belgium(B) 
Denmark(DK) 
Weser-Ems(O) 
Madrid(E) 
Paris(F) 
Strasbourg(F) 
Dublin(IRL) 
Turin(l) 
Naples(l) 
Luxembourg(L) 
Rotterdam(NL) 
London(UK) 692 
NA 
581 
1241 
620 
NA 
NA 
736 
736 
692 
594 
495 419 
NA 
327 
559 
332 
NA 
442 
349 
349 
399 
332 
398 408 
362 
357 
317 
324 
378 
319 
328 
328 
440 
348 
332 Gas prices in ECU/100 GJ/Year 
I3-2 Jan-85 Jan-90 Jan-95 
BelgiumfB) 
Denmark(DK) 
Weser-Ems(D) 
Madrid(E) 
Paris(F) 
Strasbourg(F) 
Dublin(IRL) 
Turin(l) 
Naples(l) 
Luxembourg(L) 
Rotterdam(NL) 
London(UK) 632 
NA 
581 
1241 
606 
639 
NA 
719 
719 
646 
594 
495 350 
NA 
327 
559 
324 
356 
442 
328 
328 
393 
332 
393 329 
362 
357 
305 
296 
358 
319 
313 
313 
387 
348 
327 
45 
Gas prices in ECU/100 GJ/Year 
14-1 Jan-85 Jan-90 Jan-95 
Belgium(B) 
Denmark(DK) 
Weser-EmsfD) 
Madrid(E) 
Paris(F) 
Strasbourg(F) 
DubIin(IRL) 
Turin(I) 
Naples(I) 
Luxembourg(L) 
Rotterdam(NL) 
London(UK) 632 
NA 
575 
NA 
565 
NA 
NA 
684 
684 
NA 
561 
495 350 
NA 
299 
NA 
285 
NA 
227 
309 
309 
390 
281 
338 329 
316 
299 
280 
257 
NA 
NA 
288 
288 
385 
278 
325 Gas prices in ECU/100 GJ/Year 
14-2 Jan-85 Jan-90 Jan-95 
Belgium(B) 
DenmarkfDK) 
Weser-EmsfD) 
Madrid(E) 
ParisfF) 
Strasbourg(F) 
DublinflRL) 
Turinfl) 
Naples(I) 
Luxembourg!,!.) 
RotterdamfNL) 
London(UK) 611 
NA 
556 
NA 
555 
NA 
NA 
668 
668 
NA 
561 
495 327 
NA 
299 
NA 
278 
NA 
227 
287 
287 
390 
281 
332 303 
316 
299 
280 
249 
NA 
NA 
272 
272 
385 
278 
287 
Gas prices in ECU/100 GJ/Year 
15-1 Jan-85 Jan-90 Jan-95 
BelghunfB) 
DenmarkfDK) 
Weser-EmsfD) 
MadridfE) 
ParisfF) 
StrasbourgfF) 
Dublin(IRL) 
Turin(l) 
Naples(l) 
Luxembourg(L) 
Rotterdam(NL) 
London(UK) 605 
NA 
552 
NA 
551 
NA 
NA 
630 
630 
NA 
529 
436 320 
NA 
287 
NA 
275 
NA 
227 
270 
270 
NA 
NA 
214 NA 
NA 
272 
NA 
NA 
NA 
NA 
NA 
NA 
NA 
243 
NA 
46 
GRAPHS 
ELECTRICITY PRICES 1985. 1990, 1995 
tz Jan-85 W?ÊÊÊà Jan-90 H7" .3 J.jn 9! 
Notes: 1- Bclgium(B)4- Hamburg(D)7- Pans(F)!0- Luxembourg(L)13 - Lisbon(P) 
2- Dcnmark(DK)5- Athcns(G)8- Dublin(IRL)! 1- Roöcrdaxn(NL))4- London(UK) 
3- Western Zone(D)6- Madnd(E)9- IUly(I)l2- North Brabant 
47 
GRAPHS 
ELECTRICITY PRICES 1985.1990.1995 
Notes: 1- Belgium(B)4-Hamburg(D)7-Paris(F)10-Luxembourg(L)13- Lisbon(P) 
2- Denmark(DK)5- Athens(G)8- Dublin(IRL)11-Rotterdam(NL)14- London(UK) 
3- Western Zone(D)6- Madrid(E)9- ltaly(l)12- North Brabant 
48 
GRAPHS 
NATURA!. GAS PRICES IN 1985 1990 and 1995 
iVM // 
SPA 12 
1ÔCO fCU II 
I 000 
l soo 
>?oo 
ECU 12 
SPA 13- l ECU 13-1 
ifOO 
l ?oo 
~j Jan-85 [lÄl^l Jan-95 
Notes: i- Be!gium(B)4- Hamburg(D)7- Dublin(IRL)10- Luxembourg(L) 
2- Denmark(DK)5- Paris (F)8-Turin(I)l 1- RotterdamfNL)) 
3- Weser-Ems(D)6- Strasbourg (F)9-Naples(I)12- London (UK) 
/ic> 
~~ GRAPHS 
NATURAL GAS PRICES IN 1985.1990 and 1995 
Notes 1- Belgium(B)4-Hamburg(D)7-Dublin(IRL)10-Luxembourg(L) 
2- Denmark(DK)5- Paris (F)8-Turin(l)l 1- Rotterdam(NL)) 
3- Weser-Ems(D)6- Strasbourg (F)9-Naples(l)12-London (UK) 
30 

ISSN 1024-4492 
KOM(96) 92 lopullinen 
ASIAKIRJAT 
FI 10 12 
Luettelonumero : CB-CO-96-097-FI-C 
ISBN 92-78-01242-4 
Euroopan yhteisöjen virallisten julkaisujen toimisto 
L-2985 Luxemburg