Opinion of the European Committee of the Regions – European Wind Power Action Plan
Date: 2024-10-09
Institutions: Commission for the Environment, Climate Change and Energy, European Committee of the Regions
Subjects: EU action, EU competition policy, EU energy policy, competitiveness, electrical energy, energy production, financing, investment, renewable energy, wind energy








C_202407064EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2024/7064


4.12.2024






Opinion of the European Committee of the Regions – European Wind Power Action Plan
(C/2024/7064)














Rapporteur



:


Andries GRYFFROY (BE/EA), Member of the Flemish Parliament





Reference document



:


Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions European Wind Power Action Plan

COM/2023/669 final









POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS

THE EUROPEAN COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS (CoR),








1.


supports the Commission’s efforts to strengthen the EU wind industry and promote wind power development across the EU since it has significant potential in terms of providing energy security, increasing the share of renewable energy and securing affordable energy prices, thereby resulting in greater energy independence for local and regional authorities (LRAs). In this context, the European Committee of the Regions (CoR) stresses that wind energy is one of the key technologies to reach the EU Green Deal goals;












2.


acknowledges that it is crucial to empower cities and regions to deliver on the European Union targets for clean energy and energy efficiency as outlined in the COP28 Declaration, the Fit for 55 Package, the European Wind Power Package, the EU strategy on offshore renewable energy, REPowerEU and the Green Deal;












3.


draws attention to the need to align with local and regional authorities in the Wind Energy Package in order to meet the requirements for local energy production in Europe;












4.


considers that locally-produced, clean energy such as wind power could play a considerable role in making local and regional authorities more resilient while making the EU more competitive, energy-independent and energy-secure and contributing to the regions’ decarbonisation goals;












5.


highlights that, in order to maintain the EU’s competitiveness, more support is required to ensure the decarbonisation of the economy, at the same time addressing the EU’s dependence on third countries and growing competition in clean tech sectors;












6.


notes that local supply chains in the wind sector can play a vital role in economic development and employment rates within local and regional authorities and are therefore essential for the continued wellbeing of local people;












7.


notes, however, that such wind energy projects have significant impact on spatial and maritime planning within local and regional authorities and can potentially lead to low acceptance by the local community if not properly involved; calls on the Commission for effective participation of citizens and LRAs as the 7th pillar of the WPAP; regrets that the WPAP does not recognise the importance of local acceptance and consulting including based on renewable energy communities, energy cooperatives, and energy sharing as a form of extended ‘prosumption’, or a greater local energy supply for economic and social development, in order to enhance public acceptance, community engagement and general well-being;












8.


acknowledges that wind projects are not developing fast enough to ensure resilience and energy security and that this due to a variety of reasons, which are discussed below;












9.


welcomes the European Wind Charter signed by 26 EU ministers and more than 300 companies from the wind sector in December 2023, setting out the commitment by the Member States and industry to tackle the barriers in order to ensure faster uptake of wind development projects, but regrets that local and regional authorities are not considered in this charter;












10.


underlines that local and regional authorities also have a very important role to play in the development of such wind energy projects and therefore calls for their viewpoints to be represented in further developments implementing the European Wind Power Package;












11.


supports this own-initiative opinion and the supporting technical analysis being used as a basis for this viewpoint;





Looking at the broader picture









12.


emphasises that wind energy is an intermittent energy source and needs to be transported from the point of production to the point of consumption or stored locally, in the form of either electricity or molecules, or as heat for distribution in district heating networks;












13.


notes that an adequate energy storage, transportation and distribution system, including cross-border interconnections, is essential for the realisation of the development of both onshore and offshore projects as well as for the stability of the electricity grid , and that the realisation of such critical infrastructure should go hand in hand with the uptake of wind energy and its potential;












14.


notes that this system approach is acknowledged in both the main drivers and the action plan of the WPAP, as well as in the Wind Charter, but that it is very high-level and does not provide for storage mechanisms. These storage systems will be necessary in the longer term in order to avoid curtailment of renewable energy;












15.


notes that, in certain regions, grid capacity is already hindering the connection of wind energy and that development of infrastructure within the different regions is capital-intensive and cumbersome, and that bottlenecks in supply chains for grid development projects might well hinder the connection of wind energy; emphasises the necessity of strengthening grid infrastructure to support the expansion of wind energy; urges the European Commission to prioritise investments in grid capacity and regional cooperation to handle the projected increase in wind installations with special attention to novel concepts such as smart grids and positive energy districts;












16.


emphasises, considering the rapid expansion of wind energy capacities across Europe, the need to address the entire lifecycle of windmill components; calls for more innovation activities and more capacity in recycling to ensure sustainability and resource efficiency in the wind energy sector;












17.


points out that in order to ensure the success and progress of deploying offshore renewable energies, there needs to be improved knowledge on the topic, and new technologies that support the development of these installations need to be tested. To this end, it will be important to encourage the development of testing and research platforms for offshore renewables that promote the implementation of innovative and more cost effective solutions associated with renewable energy;












18.


urges the European Commission to complement the action plan to facilitate grid build-out with a long-term local grid development plan taking into account sector coupling, for example by storing and transmitting energy in the form of molecules;












19.


calls for the Ten Year Network Development Plans (TYNDP) to be extended with transmission and storage capacity with molecules such as renewable hydrogen or other RFNBOs (renewable fuels of non-biological origin);












20.


highlights that an important share of on-shore wind energy is connected to the local distribution grid next to the transmission system. The local DSOs play a crucial role as connection points and information sources for the connection of on-shore wind energy and local and regional authorities are an important stakeholder in these local DSOs;












21.


calls for information to be shared with local and regional authorities to motivate them to signal potential bottlenecks as early as possible and to allow for proper regional planning;












22.


highlights the important role ports play in ensuring growth in the energy transition and security of energy supplies, as critical infrastructure, service stations and manufacturing hubs for offshore wind; calls for increased investment in port and terminal infrastructure as well as investment in the integration of offshore wind capacity into the continental grid; calls for adequate protection of this infrastructure as important for energy security;





Enhancing the permitting procedure









23.


notes the challenges that many EU regions bordering Russia and Belarus face when it comes to the production of wind energy due to radar and sensor defence technology. The promotion of wind power production in these regions would not only help to increase energy security but would also help to make the EU’s external border regions more resilient ECON-VII/039;












24.


acknowledges the severe delay wind developers face when requesting permits and the risks associated with this long waiting period and agrees that there is a need for a fast, transparent permitting procedure, where possible involving digital acceleration;












25.


highlights and suggests strengthening and mobilising the development of small decentralised wind energy systems with combined energy storage in order to overcome grid congestion and support small wind installations;












26.


notes that permitting is a process which is governed by, inter alia, local and regional authorities, requiring them to have competent and skilled staff. In order for local and regional authorities to conduct these processes, continuous investments and support both in tools and skills are required at local level. Just creating tools without proper education and competence management for local authorities will be suboptimal. Stability and transparency of procedures, based on objective assessments, are key for trustworthy governance. In this context, local and regional authorities should consider small-scale, low-power wind energy projects (e.g. 50 kW) and seriously assess their benefits;












27.


notes that a permitting procedure that reduces processing times or even eliminates stages of the procedure because they are not considered essential will not always mean that a permit is obtained fast: procedures and time frames need to be reasonable enough to ensure the effective participation of all parties involved, as well as society as a whole, in order to avoid long and costly litigation procedures; additionally, points out that the competent authorities must strictly adhere to the time frames of the procedures once these have been established;












28.


recognises the challenges that local and regional authorities face with permitting procedures, which often conflict with European directives and regulations such as the Bird Directive and Habitats Directive. There is a need to explore ways to enhance the efficiency and approval rate of permitting processes taking into account environmental standards. In addition, training for local and regional authorities on the provisions of the Birds and Habitats Directives (e.g. appropriate impact assessment, mitigation measures, compensatory measures, etc.) could be a serious means of limiting permitting delays;












29.


refers to various directives such as the Renewable Energy Directive, which already require action on the permitting process, and calls a streamlining of all different legislation that needs to be transposed into regional legislation;












30.


points out that the role of local and regional authorities in strategic local and regional energy planning should be consolidated in order to ensure efficient, coordinated development of energy infrastructure. Local governments and authorities can make sure the process goes more smoothly by setting up and running local energy forums. These forums could bring together relevant players in the energy sector, such as electricity grid operators, district heating companies and wind turbine operators as well as citizens.












31.


asks for a broader view from the European Commission on permitting, taking into account litigation as being an integral part of the permitting procedure and harmonising and minimising litigation procedures across Europe;












32.


calls on the European Commission take action in order to avoid litigation procedures, taking into account the principles of subsidiarity and the different DNA of each region;





Financing options









33.


highlights that the best way to ensure sustainable financing is to ensure market conditions that secure a positive business case and a stable legislative framework that includes stable tariff schemes and lowers the risk of the investment. This stable environment is also needed in order to restore the trust wind developers and investors need in order to make these investments;












34.


notes that the total system cost also depends on the grid expansion needed. Much as in the case of permitting, grid development also needs to be accounted for. Timing, transparency of the cost and social acceptance of this grid development should also be taken into account when prioritising investments in wind energy; points out that, as wind and solar production increases, there is a need for clean and flexible domestic electricity intelligent storage capacity and on site demand, to improve the resilience of the electricity system;












35.


suggests that RFNBOs can also be a cost-effective way of grid development with long-term financing needs for infrastructure as long as any actions are based on objective and scientifically documented data;












36.


refers as such to the need to also ensure proactively the necessary expansion of the transmission and distribution network in designated areas in order to secure the business case and emphasise the need to develop flexibility and storage systems in these grids in order to minimise periods of negative prices and/or production curtailment. Periods of curtailment not only diminish the share of renewables in the energy mix. They also entail considerably less income for the wind developers, thus hindering the business case;












37.


highlights that developing these network systems in both on and off-shore development should include the possibility of connecting wind farms across regions, especially off-shore, in order to avoid net congestion. Calls for the concept of off-shore bidding zones to be investigated in order to diminish curtailment for wind developers and ensure a better performing electricity market for individuals and enterprises;












38.


points to the need to identify best practices in business models to support investments in wind energy and grid system development, operation and maintenance at local level. In this context, wind energy should provide competitive advantages for local and regional authorities when it comes to defining their own energy mix;












39.


welcomes the of role of the EIB in financing and guaranteeing the financing conditions for large scale wind development projects. This role should also allow for local and regional authorities investing in local wind development projects and substantial links with local and regional authorities should be maintained and enhanced;












40.


suggests investigating setting up financing vehicles for each wind basin in order to take into account regional differences in each of these basins and in order to speed up financing in the more developed zones;












41.


notes great emphasis on Power Purchase Agreements (PPAs) and Contracts for Differences (CfDs) in the financing options. These are complex instruments potentially suited for large-scale developments, and smaller development projects should also be considered;












42.


highlights the fact that local and regional authorities have limited experience and competences on such matters and that support in transposing these concepts into regional legislation is essential;












43.


calls for the potential of citizens partially or totally financing wind energy through energy cooperatives to be taken into account, in order to provide financial profit for the citizens. These energy cooperatives should at least have similar market access to energy suppliers and financial investors. Financial return for the local community means that the wind development projects should receive more local support, avoiding costly and lengthy litigation processes;












44.


highlights the fact that at local and regional level, energy communities represent a chance to establish a sustainable, decentralised and democratic energy transition with the active participation of local and regional authorities. Such energy communities should be bottom-up, open and democratic organisational structures with voluntary membership. Based on the amended Renewable Energy Directive (RED III), renewable energy communities could exploit locally available renewable resources (including wind energy) in the form of the most appropriate legal entity (e.g. municipally-owned, cooperatives, not-for-profit, limited liability companies, special purpose companies) that best fits the local energy needs and context. It should be noted, however, that these energy communities also face permitting issues, a high administrative burden and energy suppliers asking for administrative fees, making the business case extremely difficult;












45.


highlights that while the public has a positive attitude towards renewable energies in general, individual projects are often received with scepticism or resistance from local communities;





General acceptance









46.


regrets the lack of focus in the WPAP on increasing the general acceptance of wind development projects. Local and regional authorities often feel a lot of distrust and citizens feel threatened by wind projects some being developed in their neighbourhood. Citizens play an important role in the energy transition and a fair and just transition needs to take into account their opinions and aim to ensure citizen support for wind development projects; this is why, at the environmental permitting stage, every effort needs to be made to try to achieve maximum acceptance by developing a Stakeholder Engagement Plan, which should in all cases be addressed to the local community and local authorities;












47.


notes that people can feel unheard and react with NIMBY (Not in My Backyard) or, even worse, BANANA (Built Absolutely Nothing Anywhere Near Anything) behaviour, leading to substantial polarisation in society and litigation procedures;












48.


notes that this general distrust by citizens and different stakeholders applies not just to the development of the wind parks themselves, but more generally to the infrastructure needed to connect these parks to the distribution and transmission grids. Building public acceptance must be a combined effort on both aspects;












49.


is convinced that the social acceptance of development projects is generally higher when regions and the people living in the local area enjoy a fair financial stake in the earnings;












50.


believes that, in order to increase public acceptance, the possibility should be provided of compensating both local residents and local authorities for wind energy’s negative and quantifiable impact on, landscapes and opportunities to carry out other activities in the area. This should include the possibility of compensation for certain properties that are objectively affected or access to energy generation at an advantageous price;












51.


notes that the Wind Package contains substantial support for local and regional authorities with permitting procedures, but no support, either financial or practical, to support them in their task of creating general acceptance for the development of wind energy and the energy transition in general;












52.


asks the Commission to urgently take action to build a trust platform on the aspect of energy transition. Such action could consist of a communication campaign, adapted procedures, general guidelines and good behavioural practices (as well as business models), and should aim at actively involving citizens in wind energy projects being realised within their communities. In this regard, it is essential that local and regional authorities participate from the earliest stages of the process to develop wind energy projects. Consideration should be given to the opportunity for citizens to invest in the projects;












53.


notes a need to better understand the rationale behind general acceptance. Innovation funds should not only be directed into innovation on manufacturing and reskilling, but also into projects on Social Sciences and Humanities (SSH) and on optimising windmills in line with the viewpoints of the citizens (for example noise and vibrations, shadow effects);












54.


notes that programmes that reskill and upskill workers from declining industries such as intense fossil fuel sectors, will help raise general acceptance among citizens and should therefore remain a key priority;












55.


calls for wind developers to inform local and regional authorities in a timely manner about the projects they want to develop and to be open to a mutual discussion on these projects. This is not only to benefit from the LRAs’ expertise on local conditions, but also to raise general acceptance. During this period, the aim must be to structure the wind development project in such a way as to maximise the outcome of the permitting procedure;












56.


highlights the fact that the energy transition should also focus on the societal gains from the new industry arising from renewable energy. This includes the potential for local supply chains during both development, production, installation, operation and recycling of the windmills; notes that the growth in fossil-free wind energy supply enables start-ups and expansion within the business community in general, with the concomitant jobs and incomes. Communication of success stories regarding these spill-overs is essential in order to both increase general acceptance and attract skilled people to the sector;





Ensuring a fair competition









57.


acknowledges an unlevel playing field could negatively affect EU wind equipment manufacturers and could even reduce their competitiveness on the EU market. This could result in less employment in and welfare for the EU Member States and the regions. Actions proposed in the Wind Package are crucial in order to assure this level playing field; calls on the EU to support European wind supply chains in order to strengthen the competitiveness of EU businesses while reducing dependence on third countries;












58.


bearing in mind that all EU industrial manufacturers are in a difficult financial situation and that this could drag down the entire value chain of European industry, affecting thousands of jobs throughout the EU, the Committee proposes the creation of a ‘made in and by Europe’ label that would establish the obligation of a minimum of local content in wind turbine components, as is currently done in countries such as Brazil, China, the United States and India, among others;












59.


notes that public procurement procedures undertaken by local and regional authorities need to comply with Directive 2014/24/EU on public procurement, specifying that the contract is awarded to the most economically advantageous tender identified on the basis of the lowest price or the best price–quality ratio, and acknowledges that, according to the directive, the quality criterion may include environmental and social aspects. In line with the Net Zero Industry Act (NZIA), it should also be possible to take account of competitive conditions and security of supply in public procurement, to avoid unilateral dependencies on non-EU suppliers;












60.


notes that a substantial portion of public procurement is handled by local and regional authorities and that the competences and skills of these local and regional authorities should also be taken into account. In general, the main governing aspect of tendering is still price. Evidence and experience on how to include carbon accounting is still in its early stages;












61.


calls for a simple legal and administrative basis and standard guidelines on how to include aspects such as carbon accounting or circularity, among other things, in public procurement procedures and auctioning processes;












62.


notes that it can be difficult to obtain the carbon footprint of renewable energy infrastructure from manufacturers and especially across the entire supply chain, including foreign suppliers when these needs have to be accounted for and considers that implementing the carbon border adjustment mechanism as quickly as possible is the best way forward;












63.


calls for circularity of materials and end-of-service treatment of the windmill also to be taken into account when defining procurement and auctioning procedures;












64.


notes that one of the first principles of circularity is to promote reuse instead of recycling, and calls for repowering projects to be favoured as part of fair competition;












65.


notes that favouring local employment and ecosystems in procurement and auctioning processes also has a positive impact on general public acceptance;












66.


notes that the current geopolitical context demonstrates the need for resilience and security of supply, not just for energy but also for critical materials, and continues to reaffirm the importance of local supply chains in order to achieve this resilience;






Brussels, 9 October 2024.


The President


of the European Committee of the Regions

Vasco ALVES CORDEIRO
               





ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/7064/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)