 Yn y ddweud, mae'n fawr yn fawr yn ymddiol, ac yn ymddiol, ysbyt. Yn ymddiol, mae'n ysbyt yma yn y fawr yma yn y fawr yma. Mae'n gweithio'n gweithio'n gweithio Paidi Hayes, ymddiol, ac yn ymddiol, ysbyt yw Professor Glashan, yn ymddiol, yn ymddiol, yn 30 min. A rydym yn ymddiol, wedi nhw eich mas carrotsсе yw'r agnad. Rwy'n gallu bod rhywbeth â chweithio yn sabi yn grannu, Interior yw'r bobliau yn un confidygon, felly byddwn yn y fawr ei Clean Thrawcar Cynnig i wneud a fydd lemwyd ynrain.gymweddolwydd am gyfodol i pob gyfarwyddwyr Covid Paddy Hayes, o'n rhoi gweithio i'r ysgol Gyda'r cyflawn cyfliadol yn yfafodol ESP ac yn eu cyfliadol preferlawn. Hello, ladies and gentlemen. I will keep this brief, unless I will beat the target for a few minutes. The ESP is delighted to be associated with this latest series around the areas of energy, ...y gwestiynau cydweithio eich cyfnodd gyda'r cymdeithasol sydd wedi'u gweithio cydweithio a'i'r cyfrannu... ...y chymdeithasol yn gystafell a'r cyfrannu cyfrannu. Felly, felly wefyn nhw'n mynd i'n gallu'r cyllid yw'r cyflwyno cyllidau sydd eich cyfnodd gyfrannu... ...y'n mynd i'n mynd i'n mynd i'ch cyfrannu cyfrannu a'i'n mynd i'ch cyfrannu cyfannu... ...y'r cynhyrchu fydd yn cael ei ddweud o'r cyfrannu cyfnodd cyllid... a'r llyfr yn ymwneud bwysig yn cael eu cyfnodol ac ymwneud yn ymwneud yma i'r cyfrifau ac ymwneud. Yn ymgyrch yn Yrwyntiaeth, ac mae'n dweud yn ddechrau bod ychydig cyfnodol yma i'r cyfrifau a'r cyfrifau. Rydyn ni'n dweud sut ydych chi'n dweud am y cyfrifau o'r gyfer cyfrifau, iddyn nhw'n dweud i gyfrifau. So, ddweud di'i gwybod. Well, the title of our lecture this afternoon is clean energy for all Europeans, challenges and opportunities, and it is quite timely because Brussels is just processing a package of eight legislative measures, and indeed four or five of those have gone right to the trilog stage, but there's a bit to go, but they expect to sign off in December of this year on a package that was introduced by the Commission I think in about November 2016. So there's a lot of programmes, there's a lot of debate, there's a lot of disagreement between the Parliament and the European Council what's new, but and there's a lot of protection from of incumbents position, but there's also a lot of ambition in terms of the future and renewables. Above all, I think we need to see some certainty from the investor point of view because you will only get people to invest in the technologies of the future if they're sure of the regulatory environment into which they will be investing hard-earned money and shareholders' money. It is now my pleasure just to give you three sentences to introduce Jean-Michel Glachon, so you understand exactly where he's coming from here this afternoon. Professor Glachon is the director of the Florence School of Regulation, a Centre of Excellence for Independent Discussion and Dissemination of Knowledge regarding European Regulation and Policy. He also holds the Loyola de Palacio chair of the European University Institute and he regularly advises the European Commission and European Energy Regulators. He's been coordinator or scientific advisor of several European research projects and is research partner for the Centre for Energy and Environmental Policy at MIT and the ERPG, the Energy Policy Research Group at Cambridge University. He completed his master's and doctorate degree at Sorbonne University in Paris. For 30 minutes, the floor is yours, Jean-Michel. Dear Avril, ladies, gentlemen, it's an honour to be called back at IEA in Dublin and I assume that you are assuming me to say a word about the cup. One word, done. I will be longer on the European energy package. The question is, EU, you know, I know, I know that you know, you know that I know, but what we don't know is what we don't know about EU. What do we know about EU? Because we were born in EU, because we live in EU, we know something? No. EU is an abstract construction put on the top of the countries. Countries we know, EU we do not know. We discover or not. And it's particularly true with the fourth European package, because what is a package? What is a European package? What have been the three other packages? No clue. I will then do this way. First, what's a package? Second, what did the first three packages do? Third, what's new since the third package? Ten years ago, by the way. All of this will take me 15 minutes reduced to 13. And then it will ring and then I will attack the fourth package. And the big questions like the one opened by Avril and you will be put into the discussion. I'm sorry. I had to prepare. I did prepare. First, what's a package? Easy that a package packs. It packs. What? It packs everything. Gas, electricity, renewable energy efficiency, building, greenhouse gas. It packs. So what's the content? You have to open it to know. Second, it packs also different types of flows. This you know, because you know Lee. Directives. Directives are targets. They don't say what will be done. They say what should be done. They are targets. They are becoming rules only after being transposed into each country. And Croatia won't transpose the same like Ireland, Germany and France. Example, creation of TSOs unbondling. Each country does differently. Second regulation. There are rules. This too. There are rules. They become immediately applicable in each country without any national transposition. So they are really laws. Example, European TSOs tenure network development plan or EU generation adequacy assessment. I'm not sure you read this every day, but this is really European. Really European with a caveat. Are these different types of laws implemented the same? Impossible. Why? EU laws being transposed, the directives. They are becoming national laws. They are implemented by the proper national administrations. Also by special entities as TSOs and NRAs, Garrett being national, players mainly national, plus national decrease of application. That's for the directives, for the targets. EU laws being not transposed, the regulation. They are EU laws, but they have no EU administration, no EU entities, no EU TSOs, no EU NRA, no EU player, no EU company, no EU consumers. And they have to be implemented by 28 different national friends like the national laws and there is no European decree of application. Directives are defined country by country and implemented country by country. European law is defined as a European law by implemented country by country. Here you are entering Europe. You may call it asymmetry of implementation or European regulatory gap. What did the first three packages bring us then? I will try to be quick. Grid level, the grid, the transmission, the distribution, first package, nothing. The grid can be negotiated or regulated at member state level. Do what you want, we don't care. Second package, you will get a regulator at member state level. Good. And you have to do something for cross border. What? It has to be transparent and clear. It's clear. Third package. Here it comes. Third package. Independent regulator in each member state, so it was not independent before, plus we create entities, plus we have grid codes, plus we have plan, et cetera. Now, channel. What is the proper channel to implement the grid policy? 2007 sector inquiry, DG competition. So DG competition was the one pushing because countries were not willing to push. 2009 Swedish TSO, blah, blah, blah, blah, again DG competition. So in Europe, we may have a European policy. Nevertheless, it can be the European competition authority pushing things outside of the policy. So if you think that energy policy in Europe is made by energy policy decision, you are wrong because it can be made by the competition authority. Real life. The market, no interest because I will submit up in one sentence. If you think that market rules are given by European law, you're wrong. Market rules are not given by European law because we are unable to put 28 countries to agree. So market rules are given anywhere outside of the law. Energy mix, we don't care because energy mix is a sovereign right of member states. Each state has a sovereign right to energy mix. Of course, these countries can agree to do something together, but it's voluntary. As soon as they disagree again, Poland, they stop doing. So do not think that we have a European energy mix. We have a European energy mix as long as the European countries agree. As soon as they disagree, we stop having it. So we have, we have not, we have, we have not. Like rain in Ireland has been told that for 42 days you didn't have any rain. So it rains, it doesn't rain. The rest is very interesting. Mostly the rules going with energy mix are with DigiComp because they are state aid. This is very funny because as soon as I say DigiComp, you may think it's not energy policy. It's your, it's competition policy. So we think that we have a European energy mix. We have not. We have, or we have not. We think that we found it with a European policy frame if European competition authority allows it. And the rest, well, this we don't care, have no time. If we, if you were looking at US, you will be totally amazed in US. They do not do anything like us. Grids, markets, energy mix, they do it totally different either by the content or by the authority. For example, Garrett being there is also chairman of European energy regulators. In the US, if you are state regulator, you are state regulator. You are not at the federal level. At the federal level, you have a federal regulator which is something else. So they, they do not do anything like us. They do not even understand what we do, but it's reciprocal. We do not understand what they do. But another example is that in the US, you do not have federal competition policy for energy because competition policy for energy is embedded into the federal regulator. The federal regulator is doing the competition policy for energy in Europe. No, but I cannot understand what they do. In Europe, no, but I cannot enter into more details because I have this constraint. I still have only five minutes. Oh my God. Five minutes. Third package did change a lot. It did create European bodies, Acer for regulation, but you have to know that Acer is mutualisation of national regulators. They did create N-sauce for grids, but you have to know that N-sauce are mutualisation of national T-sauce. So when you say European regulation, it's a mutualisation of the national regulator. When you say European grid, it's a mutualisation of national grids. With this, you know enough. You know enough. You know enough except that. So the regulators at European level and the T-sauce at European level are defining guidelines, main rules, and codes. It's true. So now we have a European regulation because we have codes, but they are defined by the national players at European level. First, of course, they are checked by commission, they are checked by committees designed by European Council. They are checked, but fundamentally, they are defined by national players, and then implemented by who? They are defined. Okay, but they are implemented where? They are implemented at national level, but national players, the regulators, the T-sauce. So we do not have a fully European process of European rules implemented by European bodies. We have a process of mutualisation of national players defining common rules and applying these common rules in each country, separately. That's where we are. This, I have no time. No time, no time on this. These are the codes. We have 12 codes. I was giving an idea. Then the gaps. Georges Vasconcelos is the ancestor of Garrett. He was the first chairman of European regulators and one year and a few months ago, he made with us at front school a report on the gaps, the regulatory gaps. He did find 12 gaps. 12 gaps after all the things I did show you, even after these 12 gaps. Lack of comprehensive coordination of system planning, lack of comprehensive coordination of cross-border investment, lack of comprehensive coordination of system operation, etc. There are 12. Number 12, no harmonisation of state aid to big energy consumers. In Germany, the big consumers are so weak. They're only in the German industry. They cannot afford paying for the renewable. Why? Of course, in Ireland, you can because you are strong. You are like us. We are gaelic so we are strong. I know that it is indeed, but it is indeed a few weeks ago, number 12. So last year, it was like this. That's where we are. So we can understand that we did it step by step, which is correct when the federal level is weak. We do step by step. In Canada, there is nothing in electricity here. I was in Canada four days ago. In Canada, there is no federal policy for electricity at all. And when Quebec has to export electricity to New York, the federal government is saying, would you like to take care of the Canadian export to New York? You want to take care? Please take care. So even to define the rule for exporting electricity from Canada to New York, it's made by Quebec itself. There is nothing. So in EU, we are not wrong. We have a weak federal layer, so we go step by step. So that's normal to do more steps because as the federal level is weak, the federal level cannot do new things if it is not in the law, if it has not been forced in before. So we need a new law and a new law and a new law. That's normal. There's nothing wrong because we do many, many things. We do more than Australia. We do more than Canada and frequently more than the US, not all the time, but frequently more. And more than Russia and China. So we are an exception, being so vast a set of countries doing things. But we do in this particular way. So we did enter into the current European Commission, the Yunker Commission, because Yunker made a terrible deal with the president of European Council, Tusk, former prime minister of Poland, but same political party. I know I have to switch to the second part. I will do. I will be one minute late. That's okay. So Yunker is PPE. Tusk is PPE. They are the same kind of PPE so they can make deal. And the chairman of commission energy industry at parliament is Buzek. Buzek is former chairman of the full European Parliament and is also PPE. So of course they make a deal. They made a big deal. The big deal is this commission will make it with energy, you know, particularly for security, which means Polish people will be protected from the Russians. It's a big, big thing. By the way, gas is not part of the package because Germany did block it. So you see that this political deal between the three PPE people has not been implemented for gas. Gas is for the next commission. Now I have no time for this. Now I'm entering into the fourth package. The fourth package is made of two parts, markets and policies. Market design only is made of four proposals. Directives for internal market, retail and consumers. Regulations for wholesale market. Regulations for Acer, the European regulator being Garrett and his friends. Regulations for electricity risk preparedness. If we have a crash, European crash electricity, what do we do? Plus four, plus four for energy policy pack. First, renewable energy package, including value energy plus a target for renewable energy union governance. I will tell you later what it means. Energy efficiency, performance bullsing plus a target for energy efficiency. ETS revision plus target for greenhouse gas emissions. You will see that market design is three regulations, one directive. So we don't want countries to redefine the rules. Energy policies are opposite. Four directive with run regulation so countries can redefine the rules. That's life. A bit more on market design proposal. How about this you know already? It's a mistake. I wasn't sure that you will remember, but you remember that this pack is made of one directive. I do cherry picking like the prime minister in UK. I'm doing cherry picking with you things. First, I did extract from the package for markets. Technology is level playing field. End of must run plants, end of dispatch priority. All plants should be treated the same, all technologies, plus balancing responsibilities for all, plus entry for demand response on the same level that any generator demand should be treated exactly like a supplier. And then April will say, ah the incubant there they won't like it. They will like end of dispatch priorities, the rest. They will like also balancing responsibility. Second, more on short term. Markets should close, should end, closer to real time, closer to each seconds, plus balancing reserves should be harmonized, plus balancing zone should be larger. I will not enter into detail because if you are not familiar with electricity, you won't catch even what I'm saying. But you can say there is many, many details. So this market package is really changing the way the markets operate and move and take care of each technology. And by technology, it's not difficult. You have foci fuel, nuclear, renewable and separately storage and demand response. All of this is redefined. So, but there are proposals of redefinition. Grids and answer, you have to remember the beginning. DSOs in the former package, they have been kept with the suppliers and generators like in France. Now it is proposed them to have new roles. Why? But they are asking, they are hosting all resources in Ireland, like in many countries. All the new generators are connected to the distribution grid. So distribution grid is the first line for generation. Okay, but it has not been properly regulated in the former packages at European level. So it has to be done. DSOs, DSOs, they did stay national. So to do the regional duties, you don't care, you are an island. But we are not in the continent. Each DSO is an island. We should put them together. That's the first thing. New entity for transmission system operation, the regional centres. But also we should think harmonisation of tariff. We should think harmonisation of friend congestion news. Acer, we may give Acer a finite role before European Commission vis-à-vis the end source. End source, you remember, that it is the gathering of national DSOs for network codes and guidelines. We should give bigger role to European regulation vis-à-vis European regulated. I will not enter into the rest, but you see that this package is proposing many, many detailed new things, new rules to change the landscape because the former package is 10 years old, which is before the renewable push, before digitalisation of demand, before consumers being okay to be active and responsive, and before the needs of regional attitude, regional redefinition of market rules. But also remember that everything, all of this are proposals, which is blah, blah. It's written on a paper, but commission is not adopting the proposal. You have to remember that first commission has no majority at Parliament, no majority at concierge, even no majority within commissioners. So all of this will come only from deals. However, PPD is strong. You have Junker, he was head of the list at past elections, Cagnete himself, the commissioner is PPD, Tusk, president of Europe and concierge is PPD, Tiani, president of Parliament PPD, Bezek is former president of Parliament and chairman of industry commission at Parliament also PPD, and the disputed secretary general also PPD. You have also to know that at Parliament, they mainly work together, which is very, for a French, difficult to swallow, but they work together, they do not fight much. So you have a de facto coalition of ruling parties, PPD, Democratic right, except when they are Hungarian, as you know, Alder, Liberal Democrats, SD, Democratic left and Greens, and they do deals to avoid votes in plenary. If they have a deal, they do not vote, which is strange for a Parliament for a French, but they work this way. So most of the time, they have common position at Parliament, and then they have the same type of deal at European level. After a first vote, Parliament and Concierge is both disagree, they go to Trilog, three party deal commission concierge Parliament, and they discuss, they discuss, they do not vote, they discuss, look at it because why this, we don't care, we have no time. Then we are taking a deal, we don't care, all deals have been made, which is very funny, the policy deals, the policy deals are made, and the market deals are not, but the policy deals are made. Deal on renewable, made, 14th of June, deal on governance of the union, made, 20th of June, deal on buildings, 14th of May, deal on energy efficiency, 18th of June, deal on ETS, European trading scheme for greenhouse gas, deal made, 28th of February. So all the energy policy deals are made, all of them, but not for the market. And I'm taking an example, the 14th of June, that the tweet of Commissioner, I tweet myself a lot, Commissioner Cagnete, deal, new 32% renewable target for 2030, renewables are good for Europe, and today Europe is good at renewable, Baba, hard one victory, congrats. You see that PPE is leading the deal and happy of the deal and Cagnete, when he did enter the job, he has been said a lobbyist for oil industry, since he's running the job, everybody is applauding him, including Claude Thomas, I did see Claude Thomas thanking Cagnete in public, so he really did the job, so he can be applauded, and not only him applauding the deal, that's the deal, at what time you can see, 3.38 am, am, it's a political deal, typical, typical, if you did do a lot of politics you know this, 3.38, we have a deal, and look at people shaking hands, look at them, and them, who are they? Josie Bezek, you remember former president of the parliament, PPE, Poland, Sherman of industry and energy at parliament, Miguel Cagnete, commissioner of PPE Spain, Claude Thomas, green parliament, Bulgarian presidency, I'm not sure Bulgarian presidency is a particular political party, so I didn't try to make it clearer, and then let's go at Thomas, because Thomas is not PPE, the others are close too, Claude Thomas, we reached a deal on renewable 30% targets for 2030, right to self-conception for EU citizens, and PIME all BIME, he's not saying the same that Cagnete, and then congratulations to PPE Blanco, who are these guys, so we are taking these guys one by one, so these guys are congratulated by Claude Thomas, who are they? PPE Blanco, Social Democrat Spanish, Bakke Koot, Green Belgian, Federle Liberal Democrat Danish, Sean Kelly, PPE Irish, you will check, Tamborano, five-star Italian, you can see what is the deal, it's a political deal, they do not vote, and then it is made. Is that the end of it? Conclusion or not? To conclude, first we have a deal, but EU has 32% renewable target, but whom will do it? Nobody knows. Second, regionalisation of TSO tasks, how to get a European market if each TSO does what it wants with remedial action with these borders or borders capacity investment, TSO Europeanisation, how to get a really European market is most generation investment at the SO level, but the thousands of DSOs are free to define collection rules, tariff, congestion management, etc. Four, what to do if national regulators, the garrets, national TSOs, national TSOs do not agree on same rules and same implementation of rules? Five, regionalisation for more advanced market digitalisation. If we want to digitalise the market, at European level it's difficult, so it's more realistic to go ahead a few of us, it's closer to reality, but whom will do the regulatory oversight? What regional regulatory decision we can make and monitor? So I won't say that we know, I will say that we'll come back in 2020-2022 to discuss with you what the package did and what not what it should do. Thank you.