COMMISSION STAFF WORKING PAPER Results of the public consultation on the external dimension of the EU energy policy
Date: 2011-09-07
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: coal, cooperation agreement, energy supply, intergovernmental cooperation (EU), security of supply, third country

EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Brussels, 7.9.2011 
SEC(2011) 1023 final 

COMMISSION STAFF WORKING PAPER 

Results of the public consultation on the external dimension of the EU energy policy 

Accompanying the document 

COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN 
PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL 
COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS 

On security of energy supply and international cooperation - "The EU Energy Policy: 
Engaging with Partners beyond Our Borders" 

{COM(2011) 539 final} 
{SEC(2011) 1022 final} 

 
 
 
 
  
 
The Commission Communication "Energy 2020 - A strategy for competitive, sustainable and 
secure  energy"  highlighted  the  need  to  strengthen  the  external  dimension  of  the  EU  energy 
policy as one of the key priorities in the coming years. A coordinated, efficient and prioritised 
external energy policy is necessary to pursue Europe's energy objectives and interests.  

The  Commission  initiated  on  21  December  2010  a  public  consultation1  on  the  external 
dimension of the EU energy policy in order to seek stakeholders' views on possible priorities 
and initiatives in this field. 

A total of over 90 contributions were received. These came from a wide range of interested 
parties. Seven Member States responded, together with four regulators' associations and two 
Transmission  System  Operators.  Furthermore,  contributions  were  submitted  by  industry 
players  and  associations,  NGOs,  think  tanks,  social  partners,  individual  citizens,  academia, 
and consumers' associations.  

In  addition  to  the  formal  consultation  process,  targeted  discussions  were  undertaken  with  a 
number  of  stakeholders.  A  specialised  event  was  organised  on  6  April  2011  by  the 
Commission services, bringing together external energy and foreign policy experts to debate 
key challenges and policy options for the EU external energy relations. 

The  following  sections  of  the  document  summarise  the  views  expressed  by  stakeholders 
throughout the consultation process. 

1. 

INTEGRATING  ENERGY  MARKETS  AND  REGULATORY  NETWORKS  WITH  OUR 
NEIGHBOURS 

Question  1:  Should  the  EU  promote  further  energy  market  integration  and  regulatory 
convergence  (notably  as  regards  energy  market  regulation,  environmental  and  safety 
standards) with its neighbours? Is there a need for a differentiated approach between the 
Eastern and Southern neighbours or between countries? 

The  majority  of  contributors  expressed  the  desire  for  further  energy  market  integration  and 
regulatory  convergence  in  the  EU's  neighbourhood  and  beyond.  Most  acknowledged  that 
cross-border  investment  and  trade  can  flow  more  easily  with  compatible  market  rules, 
strengthening energy security in Europe.  

There  was  a  broad  agreement  that  a  stable,  reliable  and  transparent  legal  framework  was 
required  in  third  countries  and  for  the  EU  approach  towards  them.  This  would  ensure  the 
necessary  conditions  for  EU  investment  and  its  protection  in  third  countries.  A  sizeable 
number of contributions drew attention to the need for compatible environmental and safety 
standards in the neighbourhood, in order to ensure a true level playing field.  

Regarding electricity markets, a number of contributions mentioned the need for a common 
approach  on  issues  like  capacity  allocation,  congestion  management  and  balancing 
frameworks, based on the principles of liberalized  markets.  Another  suggested  solution  was 
for imported electricity to be traded through power exchange mechanisms that "filter away" 
energy produced under environmentally unsound conditions.  

1 

http://ec.europa.eu/energy/international/consultations/20110221_external_dimension_en.htm. 

EN 

2 

   EN 

 
                                                 
A substantial part of the contributions pointed towards a differentiated approach to promoting 
the energy-related acquis in the Eastern and Southern neighbourhood. Political environment, 
legal heterogeneity, energy policy, degree of energy market liberalization and availability of 
domestic resources were underlined as criteria influencing the approach with each country.  

It  was  noted  that  the  EU  is  in  a  position  to  assist  third  countries  with  regulatory,  financial, 
training and R&D programs. It is necessary, however, to better explain the EU's offer, as well 
as  to  increase  synergies  with  other  institutions  active  in  the  region,  in  particular  with  the 
European  Bank  for  Reconstruction  and  Development  (EBRD).  It  was  suggested  that 
cooperation  with  neighbouring  countries  be  based  on  three  thematic  dimensions  –  general 
security,  innovation  and  market  access.  Specific  cooperation  instruments  could  include:  (i) 
energy  innovation  pacts,  (ii)  efficiency  and  sustainability  partnerships,  (iii)  bilateral 
renewable energy platforms, and (iv) twinning projects.  

Most  of  the  contributors  acknowledged  the  Energy  Community  Treaty  (EnCT)  as  the  best 
available instrument for collaboration with external partners, to drive infrastructure expansion 
to the East and South of Europe and raise environmental standards. Full accession of Turkey 
and Georgia was mentioned as a short-term priority, whereas a medium/long term aim would 
be the extension to Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus and countries in the Middle East and North 
Africa  (MENA)  region.  Some  respondents  argued  that  the  EnCT  should  include  market 
integration  as  a  goal,  rather  than  a  recommendation.  Others  believed  that  it  must  integrate 
clear  procedures  and  new  acquis  on  renewable  energy  sources  and  the  third  energy  market 
package.  The  existing  collaboration  between  regulators  should  be  continued,  a  number  of 
stakeholders answered, as information exchange and twinning projects have been successful 
so far.  

States without free trade agreements with the EU should be supported to adhere to WTO rules 
and to make use of structures like the Eastern Partnership or the Energy Community Treaty. 
Respondents acknowledged that third countries cannot be pressured, but can be supported to 
voluntarily adopt the EU energy acquis, should they consider it necessary.  

Question 2: Should the EU take concrete actions to foster greater investment in renewable 
energy sources in its neighbouring countries? What actions? 

Many  stakeholders  agreed  that  the  EU  should  promote  investment  in  renewable  energy 
sources  in  its  neighbourhood,  particularly  in  the  MENA  region  and  also  in  countries  like 
Russia. Such action would stimulate the EU energy industry, contribute to reaching the 2020 
goals in a more affordable manner and strengthen the Union's energy security. 

Some respondents noted that by promoting decarbonisation agenda abroad the EU will expose 
itself to higher energy prices and related domestic political pressures. Others emphasized that 
that  renewable  energy  generation  is  less  politically  sensitive  than  fossil  fuels  and, 
consequently,  collaboration  might  enhance  trust  between  the  EU  and  its  external  energy 
partners. 

Another  view  was  that  primary  focus  must  be  on  the  EU's  internal  potential  for  renewable 
energy, particularly solar energy in the Iberian Peninsula and offshore wind power in the UK, 
complemented  with  some  degree  of  cooperation  with  neighbourhood  countries  (e.g. 
dissemination of best practices and R&D results in the field of renewable generation). 

EN 

3 

   EN 

 
To promote investments in renewable energy in the neighbourhood, several challenges were 
outlined. Most notable was the necessity to provide a common legal ground, based on the EU 
Renewables  Directive  (2009/28/EC).  There  was  a  clear  message  that  greenhouse  gas 
emissions  reductions  and  renewable  generation  projects  in  third  countries  need  to  count 
towards  the  Member  States'  sustainability  targets.  Enhanced  transmission  possibilities, 
especially interconnection capacity, are also needed.  

Large investments in renewable energy generation in the neighbourhood countries could only 
take  place  in  the  long-run  and  would  require  non-discriminatory  treatment  for  investors, 
regulatory  coordination,  as  well  as  convergence  of  environmental  and  safety  standards.  A 
number  of  contributions  also  emphasized  that  due  to  high  costs  entailed  by  renewables  and 
due  to  economic  possibilities  of  neighbouring  countries  such  projects  should  be  initiated  if 
proven profitable for both sides in the short and long-term. It was highlighted that diminishing 
regulatory  risks  associated  with  renewable  generation  can  act  in  the  same  way  as  financial 
incentives,  by  reducing  the  risk  premium  paid  for  investments.  Concrete  activities  such  as 
training  of  electricity  experts  or  twinning  projects,  through  the  Technical  Assistance  and 
Information  Exchange  Instrument  (TAIEX),  and  collaboration  with  the  Association  of  the 
Mediterranean  Regulators  for  Electricity  and  Gas  (MEDREG)  and  MEDELEC  (the  Liaison 
Committee  of  Electricity  Associations  around  the  Mediterranean  Basin)  were  considered  as 
useful to promote regulatory cooperation and common projects. It was also suggested that a 
decarbonisation  provision  be  included  in  the  acquis  covered  by  the  Energy  Community,  so 
that it can better frame investments in renewable energy. 

A  few  respondents  indicated  energy  efficiency  as  a  priority  for  strengthening  economic 
competitiveness in the neighbourhood. Others saw energy efficiency as a natural complement 
to renewable energy, needed to ensure sustainability both in the EU and in the neighbourhood. 
Insulation  of  buildings,  efficient  appliances  and  more  efficient  transport  were  the  types  of 
measures highlighted. 

Financial support from the EU for renewables-related investments in the neighbourhood was 
considered  by  many  respondents  as  contingent  on  the  existence  of  a  common  legal 
framework.  The  stakeholders  suggested  that  the  EU  ought  to  ensure  more  support  via  the 
European Investment Bank (EIB) and the EBRD, in order to develop small-scale, distributed 
renewable  generation  in  the  neighbourhood.  The  European  Neighbourhood  and  Partnership 
Instrument (ENPI) should be used to move renewable energy and energy efficiency projects 
higher on the agenda of international financial institutions. Potential financial instruments that 
were  suggested  included  an  EIB  investment  fund  for  initial  investments,  a  feed-in-tariff 
scheme  for  EU  imports  from  solar  thermal  electricity  plants  in  MENA  countries,  guarantee 
bonds  for  "first-of-their-kind"  projects  in  case  investors  do  not  wish  to  assume  the  risk, 
binding contributions for bankable projects, and public-private partnerships with EU utilities. 
The latter would have the EU rather than individual Member States as the public counterpart.  

2. 

STRENGTHENING  PARTNERSHIPS  WITH  ENERGY  SUPPLIERS  AND  TRANSIT 
COUNTRIES 

Question 3: What measures should the EU take to reinforce and focus its partnerships with 
key  suppliers  (of  hydrocarbons  and  other  energy  sources)  and  transit  countries?  What 
should be the focus of such enhanced partnerships? (What countries? What topics?) 

EN 

4 

   EN 

 
A  considerable  number  of  respondents  suggested  that  Europe's  long-term  reliance  on  fossil 
fuels  needed  to  be  clearly  reaffirmed  in  order  not  to  mislead  energy  suppliers.  As  the  oil 
market is global and fairly liquid, it was suggested to focus on enhanced partnerships on the 
provision of natural gas, as the EU is within commercial reach of around two thirds of known 
resources.  Others  noted  that  oil  security  is  just  as  important  as  natural  gas  and  electricity 
security. 

Many  contributions  advocated  that  the  role  of  the  EU  is  to  promote  a  reliable  legal  and 
institutional  framework  in  order  to  achieve  mutually  advantageous  relations  with  its  main 
energy  supplier  and  transit  countries.  Furthermore,  stakeholders  urged  for  reciprocity  in 
bilateral  relations  to  ensure  access  for  the  EU  to  upstream  resources  in  third  countries  and 
access to the EU market for third countries. 

Even though national bilateral arrangements are the basis for cooperation, a few stakeholders 
indicated  that  the  EU  should  step  in  to  eliminate  common  barriers  to  investment  and  trade. 
While most of the respondents were of the opinion that markets and companies should be the 
motor of the EU energy security, they also admitted the role of foreign policy. The European 
External  Action  Service  (EEAS)  needed  to  gain  weight  in  ensuring  coherence  between 
political dialogue and legislative provisions with energy suppliers and transit countries, it was 
stated. Additionally, a common energy crisis management system was advocated for. 

A number of stakeholders indicated that the EU should further promote existing multilateral 
frameworks.  The  Energy  Charter  Treaty  (ECT)  modernisation  can  be  used  as  a  platform  in 
this respect. WTO accession for suppliers that have not yet joined should be supported by the 
EU, stakeholders generally agreed.  

Priority  should  be  given  to  efforts  to  stimulate  export  capacity  in  neighbouring  countries, 
including  in  the  Southern  Mediterranean  region.  To  deepen  relations,  the  EU  should  offer 
Russia,  the  Organization  of  Petroleum  Exporting  Countries  (OPEC)  and  other  important 
regions for oil supply (West Africa, Iraq, Kazakhstan) a bundled package of energy and broad 
economic development related measures, it was underlined. There was a broad agreement that 
the  EU-Russia  Energy  Dialogue  and  the  Early  Warning  Mechanism  are  examples  of  good 
practice, which should be extended to other countries and regions. 

The renewed European Neighbourhood Policy should leverage closer relations with countries 
in Central Asia and South Caucasus. Private initiatives for development of gas import routes 
within  the  Southern  Corridor  were  considered  of  high  importance.  Furthermore,  LNG 
suppliers are gaining importance for EU supply diversification.  

Stakeholders  identified  Ukraine  and  Turkey  as  main  transit  countries,  noting  that  their 
effective integration into the Energy Community was necessary.  

Whereas  some  stakeholders  advocated  that  no  derogation  should  be  made  from  the  rules  of 
the EU internal energy market (on transparency, liquidity, free transit and investment), others 
acknowledged that key suppliers of hydrocarbons will inevitably require some flexibility.  

Importance  of  transparency  to  reduce  corruption  in  resource-rich  supplier-countries  was 
underlined  and  support  was  expressed  for  the  EU  to  adopt  an  equivalent  of  the  EITI,2 

2 

EITI – Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative 

EN 

5 

   EN 

 
                                                 
requiring listed oil, gas and minerals companies to declare accurate values of financial flows 
between them and governments of the countries they operate in.  

Question 4: How can the EU best support complex infrastructure projects outside the EU 
that  can  contribute  to  enhancing  the  EU  security  of  supply  and  diversifying  its  supply 
sources  and  routes?  For  instance,  should  the  EU  seek  to  coordinate  or  be  party  to 
intergovernmental agreements (IGA) which concern projects of European interest? 

Most  of  the  contributors  saw  the  EU  as  a  provider  of  knowledge,  funding  and/or  political 
support  for  complex  infrastructure  undertakings  outside  its  borders.  At  the  same  time,  a 
number of respondents thought that the EU should focus on internal interconnections to match 
already  existing  external  infrastructure  and  only  then  on  promotion  of  new  projects.  There 
was  a  clear  call  to  further  strengthen  the  role  of  the  private  sector  in  materialising  complex 
external  infrastructure  projects.  This  was  seen  as  closely  intertwined  with  the  need  for 
transparent investment laws in supplier/transit countries, thus facilitating a level playing field 
for effective competition.  

The  EU  could  sponsor  construction  costs  but  should  not  contribute  to  commercial  risk 
mitigation,  several  stakeholders  agreed.  While  the  rule  of  thumb  for  such  infrastructure 
projects is to find financing on the market, there was a general view that the EU could provide 
funding  if  a  number  of  conditions  are  fulfilled  (compliance  with  the  related  EU  acquis, 
ensuring  individual  Member  States'  interests,  accounting  for  the  public  good  value  of  the 
infrastructure concerned, difficulties in accessing other funds, and no market price distortion 
due  to  such  support).  Finally,  the  EU  was  called  upon  to  encourage  the  EIB  to  provide 
additional funding for infrastructure projects, which were seen as a way to address the impacts 
of the current economic downturn. 

the  EU 

regarding 

involvement 

in  negotiating 
Different  views  were  expressed 
intergovernmental agreements. The most prominent was that the Union ought to become party 
to agreements regarding the free passage of goods and long-term guarantees, but not become 
involved  in  commercial  agreements  between  companies.  Others  were  of  the  opinion  that 
rather than becoming party to intergovernmental agreements, the EU should act as a mediator. 
A  third  suggestion  was  a  supervisory  role  for  agreements  referring  to  supply/transit  routes 
diversification, under a common set of rules. Finally, a few stakeholders declared themselves 
satisfied  with  the  current  state  of  play  regarding  the  EU's  involvement  in  agreements  for 
complex external infrastructure projects, noting the provisions on information exchange of the 
recent Gas Security of Supply Regulation.  

The  Southern  Corridor  and  particularly  Nabucco  were  regarded  by  many  stakeholders  as 
priority projects to secure gas imports into the EU. Stakeholders believed that the EU should 
act  to  neutralise  political  rivalries  between  major  external  infrastructure  projects,  and  noted 
that visits of high-level EU officials to the countries concerned have already lead to positive 
results. Part of the respondents called for centralized EU energy raw materials procurement, to 
achieve  synergies  from  large  scale  purchases.  In  this  respect,  the  Caspian  Development 
Corporation model of a single purchaser of gas from Turkmenistan was generally supported, 
even though a few contributions felt its' concept contradicts market principles.  

Opinions  regarding  the  development  of  the  Mediterranean  Energy  Ring  diverged,  as  some 
stakeholders  insisted  it  was  not  financially  feasible,  while  others  believed  it  would  be  a 
cornerstone  for  grid  stability  in  the  region.  A  few  responses  asked  for  caution  regarding 
increased interconnection with Ukraine, Belarus and the Kaliningrad region of Russia. 

EN 

6 

   EN 

 
Some stakeholders were of the opinion that to be sustainable, future electricity grids should be 
extended and made to incorporate low carbon sources. Not only would this strategy permit the 
EU to enhance electricity security, but also to export new technologies, spearheading a global 
grid  upgrade.  A  few  players  suggested  that  building  the  interconnections  with  the  Southern 
Mediterranean  region  can  only  be  mediated  via  intergovernmental  agreements,  setting  the 
framework  for  cooperation  between  the  Agency  for  Cooperation  of  Energy  Regulators 
(ACER) and local regulators, and between grid operators. 

Complex infrastructure should not diminish energy security of the third countries concerned, 
nor  should  they  harm  human  rights,  social  development  or  the  environment.  A  few 
stakeholders  considered  that  several  external  large  projects  had  a  strong  impact  on  such 
aspects. Additionally, others drew attention to the need to enhance public acceptance of such 
infrastructure projects.  

3. 

PROMOTING  THE  EU  ROLE  IN  SETTING  THE  GLOBAL  AGENDA  FOR  SAFE, 
COMPETITIVE AND LOW CARBON ENERGY 

Question 5: What focus should the EU give to its energy cooperation with major consuming 
countries? In what topics and countries could the EU action bring most added-value? 

The  shift  towards  a  low-carbon  economy  is  seen  as  unavoidable  in  the  long-run.  The  EU 
should  take  advantage  of  its  advanced  legal  and  institutional  framework  to  speed  up  the 
process  and  to  be  in  a  position  to  promote,  export  and  exchange  best  practices  with  large 
economies and developing countries. Among the most frequent examples mentioned were the 
development  of  an  international  market  for  carbon  offsets  and  the  export  of  demand 
management  measures.  By  reaching  out  to  the  world's  largest  energy  consumers,  the  EU 
would contribute to creating of appropriate global measures to tackle climate change.  

The  main  energy  consumers  mentioned  in  the  responses  were:  Brazil,  China,  India,  Japan, 
Russia  and  the  USA,  as  well  as  Sub-Saharan  Africa  and  countries  in  South  America.  The 
predominant view was that energy collaboration with these countries ought to be focused on 
promoting  clean  technologies,  energy  efficiency  measures  and  related  know-how,  with  the 
aim  of  diminishing  and  decarbonising  energy  consumption  and  at  the  same  time  avoiding 
carbon  leakage.  Equally  important,  these  collaborations  could  stimulate  the  EU  energy 
industry  and  contribute  to  bringing  forward  commercial  maturity  for  the  technologies  in 
question.  Progress  could  be  even  more  rapid  should  the  EU  also  promote  its  environmental 
standards in these countries. 

Several voices advocated that the EU lead by example and establish an international platform 
for technology and R&D-related cooperation, focusing on renewables, energy efficiency, low 
carbon technologies (such as CCS), as well as nuclear generation. 

The  EU  should  be  prepared  to  invest  in  local  low  carbon  energy  production  in  order  to 
stimulate  initiatives  in  developing  countries,  including  by  redirecting  funds  from  fossil-fuel 
projects.  The  Kyoto  Clean  Development  Mechanism  and  Joint  Implementation  instruments 
are  investment  channels  that  may  be  used  to  invest  in  developing  countries  for  the  mutual 
benefit, and the EU should support their prolongation, it was stated.  

With  the  US  in  particular,  one  of  the  main  collaboration  topics  should  be  shale  gas 
development. For cooperation with China and India, renewables and low carbon technologies 

EN 

7 

   EN 

 
were  deemed  as  the  most  important  issues.  Another  suggestion  was  to  prepare  a  policy  in 
response  to  Chinese  energy  agreements  with  countries  in  the  Caspian,  Central  Asia  and 
Africa.  For  African  countries,  energy  access  issues  were  considered  as  the  most  relevant 
topic.  In  Brazil,  Mexico,  Argentina  and  Colombia,  new  oil  discoveries  and  ever  growing 
energy consumption may materialise into an opportunity for the EU oil extraction industry. At 
the  same  time,  diplomatic  efforts  were  seen  as  necessary  minimise  protectionism  in  these 
countries. 

Question  6:  Should  the  EU  take  action  to  increase  its  collective  weight  in  global  energy 
discussions and in international organizations and initiatives dealing with energy? How? 

There  was  general  consensus  that  the  EU  should  enhance  its  weight  in  global  energy 
discussions  and  become  a  normative  power  with  regard  to  promoting  energy  efficiency  and 
low-carbon  technologies.  Promoting  sustainability  in  this  way  should  not  penalise  specific 
carbon-intensive technologies too severely.  

A  considerable  part  of  respondents  believe  that  credibility  will  naturally  come  with  the  EU 
leading  by  example  –  by  living  up  to  international  commitments,  especially  in  relation  to 
climate change, implementing the "20:20:20" strategy, consolidating its leadership role on the 
low carbon technologies and distributed generation markets, and its successful energy R&D.  

The  more  coordinated  and  non-contradictory  its  actions,  the  clearer  will  Europe's  voice  be 
heard.  Equally  important,  it  was  recalled  that  single-handed  EU  commitment  to  mitigate 
climate  change  is  not  sufficient.  To  this  end,  efforts  are  required  to  engage  the  rest  of  the 
world on the same track. To fulfil its climate leadership ambition, some respondents argued 
that the EU should promote natural gas as a relatively "clean" fossil fuel and CCS. 

The  EU  needs  to  stay  involved  in  a  variety  of  international  organizations  in  order  to  stay 
abreast of the emerging energy issues and be in a better position to address them later. The 
main international fora with which the EU should reinforce its  involvement  are:  the  Energy 
Charter (ECT), the International Energy Agency (IEA), G8 and G20, the International Energy 
Forum (IEF), the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the International Partnership 
for  Energy  Efficiency  Cooperation  (IPEEC),  the  International  Thermonuclear  Experimental 
Reactor (ITER), and the International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA).  

Some  respondents  underlined  the  ECT  as  the  best  channel  for  the  EU  to  disseminate  its 
energy  acquis  abroad.  It  was  also  added  that  the  United  Nations  Development  Programme 
(UNDP)  or  the  United  Nations  Environment  Programme  (UNEP)  should  be  used  to 
disseminate  best  practices  in  least  developed  countries.  Relations  with  the  IEA  were 
highlighted as necessary to attain robust data, build accurate scenarios and, consequently, take 
proper policy decisions.  

Financial  support  was  also  mentioned  as  a  way  to  increase  the  EU's  weight  in  international 
energy fora.  

Question 7: What initiatives could help the EU promote nuclear safety, security and non-
proliferation standards globally? 

There  was  a  general  agreement  that  the  EU's  nuclear  safety  standards  are  very  high  when 
compared to the existing global references and that these should be promoted widely, together 
with  EU  best  practices  and  related  technology.  Some  contributions  expressed  caution  and 

EN 

8 

   EN 

 
encouraged a step-by-step approach, as there is wide global divergence on the topic of nuclear 
energy. 

Legally binding international commitments on nuclear safety and non-proliferation standards 
ought to be in line with the objectives of the EU Energy 2020 Strategy and the existing and 
legislation.  When  promoting  its  own  standards,  the  EU  should  take  into  account  WENRA3 
objectives for new reactors, together with Euratom and IAEA provisions. It was stressed that 
useful work should not be duplicated, but integrated in the EU strategy. In this sense, more 
use of ENSREG, ENSRA and ESARDA4 frameworks as well as the Instrument for Nuclear 
Safety Cooperation and the Instrument for Stability was encouraged, together with promoting 
international  conventions  (UN  Espoo,  the  Nuclear  Safety  Convention  of  the  IAEA  and 
WENRA).  

These efforts should be done in conjunction with promoting a low carbon energy paradigm, 
especially since there are parties who see nuclear energy as a major solution for greenhouse 
gas  emissions  reduction.  This  is  especially  relevant  as  countries  with  growing  energy 
consumption in Asia and Latin America show themselves engaged in nuclear initiatives and 
should  be  persuaded  to  adopt  the  highest  standards.  Russia  and  countries  of  the 
Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS), which already have a substantial nuclear fleet, 
should  also  be  encouraged  to  upgrade  their  existing  nuclear  safety  and  security  standards 
along the entire nuclear fuel cycle to the international level. 

R&D  partnerships  were  also  commonly  desired  solutions,  especially  in  collaboration  with 
countries like the US, Japan and South Korea. The US model of smaller, more geographically 
distributed reactors was regarded as a proposition that the EU should promote. In addition, it 
was suggested that alternative fuels, such as thorium, are tested with a view to reducing costs 
and increasing safety. 

A  few  respondents  specifically  thought  that  the  EU  should  establish  a  minimum  nuclear 
technology  requirement  for  its  internal  energy  market,  channelling  its  attention  away  from 
third and towards fourth and fifth generation reactors. 

Finally, on non-proliferation, one of the suggested measures was for the EU to halt exports of 
nuclear  technology  and  services  to  countries  that  did  not  sign  the  Non-Proliferation  Treaty 
and to signatories with a weak rule of law. 

4. 

BETTER COMBINING EU AND MEMBER STATES' EFFORTS TO PROMOTE EUROPEAN 
ENERGY INTERESTS 

Question  8:  How  could  the  EU  and  its  Member  States  gain  together  greater  impact  on 
international energy issues? What concrete actions should be taken to ensure synergies and 
coordination between Member States' initiatives and EU initiatives? 

Stakeholders  agreed  that  a  balance  is  needed  between  the  concept  of  the  EU  speaking  with 
one voice and the liberty of each Member State to choose their own energy mix and energy 
strategy, and to establish international ties.  

3 
4 

WENRA – Western European Nuclear Regulators Association 
ENSREG  –  European  Nuclear  Safety  Regulators  Group,  ENSRA  –  European  Nuclear  Security 
Regulators Association, ESARDA – European Safeguards Research and Development Association 

EN 

9 

   EN 

 
                                                 
Stakeholders  thought  that  the  key  factor  that  can  fuel  effective  coordination  between  the 
Member States is genuine internal energy market integration. Concrete results internally can 
also  bring  international  prestige  (e.g.  effectively  established  EU-wide  energy  efficiency 
standards  for  buildings).  Moreover,  it  was  said  that  once  commercial  arrangements  start  to 
dominate  the  energy  market  instead  of  politically-motivated  arrangements,  the  synergies 
between  Member  States'  and  the  EU-level  initiatives  would  be  captured  more  easily. 
Transparency  and  reciprocal  confidence  were  considered  as  pillars  for  cooperation  between 
the Member States.  

Nevertheless, others supported the view that possibilities to formulate policies exist only on 
issues  with  a  broad  consensus  among  the  Member  States.  A  few  examples  mentioned  are 
renewable energy policy, energy efficiency, infrastructure and market liberalisation.  

Another  concrete  suggestion  was  to  reach  coordination  horizontally,  between  existing 
agreements  and  initiatives  (e.g.  Energy  Community,  Baku  Initiative  and  investments  in 
external  supply  in  general)  and  vertically,  between  relevant  policy  fields  (such  as  trade, 
development  cooperation,  sustainability).  In  addition,  improved  consultation  with  industry 
and  exchanges  between  Member  States'  experts  are  needed  to  increase  the  EU's  weight  in 
international energy discussions. 

On the regulatory side, platforms like the IERN (the International Energy Regulation Network 
(IERN) and ICER (the International Confederation of Energy Regulators) can be increasingly 
used to disseminate best practices among Member States. Further information sharing could 
occur by creating a database with relevant projects by region/Member State/third country, to 
which all EU countries could have access. ACER was seen positively in terms of contribution 
to internal synergies, together with existing dialogues and information exchange mechanisms. 

A number of respondents put emphasis on the potential role of the EU High Representative 
for Foreign  Affairs and Security Policy, whose action needs to further  promote the external 
dimension of the EU energy policy. 

Question 9: Do you consider that the compliance with EU internal market rules and the EU 
energy security objectives of Member States' bilateral agreements with third countries can 
be an issue? Should the EU take action to ensure compliance? How? 

A  considerable  number  of  responses  denoted  the  belief  that  Member  States'  individual 
bilateral agreements frequently disregard the internal energy market rules and the interests of 
other  Member  States.  Overall,  it  was  thought  that  a  common  approach  can  be  a  more 
appropriate and effective way to ensure energy security in the long-run.  

Many stakeholders agreed that the EU should step in to ensure compliance between  current 
and future bilateral agreements and internal energy market rules. Some respondents recalled, 
however, that changing the existing bilateral agreements requires re-negotiation with energy 
suppliers.  In  addition,  some  respondents  considered  bilateral  agreements  to  be  of  strictly 
national  competence  –  especially  since  Member  States'  bilateral  initiatives  with  third 
countries can in this way benefit from healthy effects of competition. The EU should not itself 
be a party in agreements, unless such involvement is justified. 

Strong  support  was  given  to  ensuring  more  transparency  on  the  current  and  future 
intergovernmental agreements. A few respondents expressed worries about the eventuality of 
revealing commercially sensitive information and pointed out that the existing framework for 

EN 

10 

   EN 

 
EU law enforcement was largely sufficient. These respondents preferred to have the existing 
infringement procedures reinforced. 

The creation of clear set of guidelines for the negotiation of bilateral energy agreements with 
third  countries  by  all  Member  States  was  also  mentioned.  Developing  a  common  list  of 
objectives  for  each  cooperation  area  (memoranda,  agreements  on  strategic  partnerships, 
extended  cooperation)  was  one  possibility.  Another  proposal  was  to  create  an  approval 
procedure  on  competition  and  trade  matters  before  signature  of  bilateral  agreements.  A 
number  of  stakeholders  also  believed  that  in  order  to  forestall  non-compliance  and 
duplications, EU-level notification of new bilateral agreements, as called for by the European 
Council of the 4th February 2011, should be made mandatory.  

Question 10: How could the European industry and civil society best contribute to the EU 
external energy policy objectives? 

Primarily, the role of companies was acknowledged as crucial for a successful external energy 
policy. By exercising their core commercial purpose, companies can generate wealth to pay 
for imports, contribute towards infrastructure optimization, develop indigenous resources, as 
well as foster low carbon technologies, effective energy efficiency measures and consumption 
reduction.  Furthermore,  companies  can  also  disseminate  all  these  best  practices  in  third 
countries where they operate. 

The EU should promote not only its best practices but also share its' less positive experiences. 
As an example, lessons drawn from the experience of private companies acting inside the EU 
can  be  used  in  third  countries,  with  the  added  benefit  of  depoliticising  the  energy  relation 
between the EU and its partners. 

Energy  policy  goals  are  attainable  if  economically  and  technically  feasible,  but  also  if 
publicly  acceptable,  it  was  added.  Civil  society  organizations  frequently  ask  for  more 
transparency on energy costs in order to help consumers understand energy mix decisions and 
tax  policy.  The  public  should  be  further  informed  on  the  high  degree  of  external  energy 
dependence, so as to encourage reduced consumption, increased alignment of the EU internal 
energy market and enhanced renewable energy goals. Dissemination of accurate information 
is the optimal solution for society's best response. 

The EU can also provide financing to NGOs that undertake independent research, as well as 
initiatives for local alternative energy generation, involving citizens trying to actively reduce 
their carbon footprints. 

Another  prominent  opinion  was  that  the  European  Commission  should  hold  regular 
meetings/consultations with industry and civil society on external energy policy matters. By 
inviting  representatives  from  all  stakeholder  groups,  it  could  gain  useful  periodical  and 
independent evaluation for the EU external energy policy. 

Finally, it was noted that the existing mechanisms for openness and transparency within the 
EU institutions must be made more accessible, in order to achieve more effective contribution 
by industry and civil society to reaching the EU external energy policy objectives. 

EN 

11 

   EN