Proposition 54K1911

Projet de loi modifiant la loi du 29 avril 1999 relative à l'organisation du marché de l'électricité en ce qui concerne la modification du mécanisme en vue de l'octroi de certificats verts pour l'électricité produite conformément à l'article 6, le financement du câble sous-marin et l'écart de production.

General information ¶

Submitted by

MR Swedish coalition

Submission date

June 21, 2016

Official page

Visit

Status

Adopted

Requirement

Simple

Subjects

electrical energy environmental protection State aid renewable energy wind energy

Voting ¶

Voted to adopt

CD&V LE PS | SP ∉ Open Vld N-VA LDD MR VB

Voted to reject

PVDA | PTB

Abstained from voting

Groen Vooruit Ecolo DéFI PP

Contact form ¶

Do you have a question or request regarding this proposition? Select the most appropriate option for your request and I will get back to you shortly.

Discussion ¶

July 14, 2016 | Plenary session (Chamber of representatives)

Full source

I would like to refer to my written report.

Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker. The support mechanism for the remaining wind turbines is being re-examined and reformed.

Ladies and gentlemen, this is not the first time. The previous government has also implemented reforms.

It is always very important, when such a reform is done, that a balance is sought. We must ensure a certain investment climate and clarity for future investors, on the one hand, and be careful not to over-subsidize, on the other. After all, the invoice for families and ⁇ should not be hunted in vain.

The present draft law and the future royal decree are a major step in the reform of the support mechanisms for the two parks Norther and Rentel. Through the revision, the excess subsidy is filed and according to the Minister, a total amount of 986 million euros will not be transferred to the consumer.

It is also a good thing that the support is differentiated by park and in relation to the changed economic conditions.

Mrs. Minister, CD&V is thus satisfied with the content of the draft, however we ask you to look more forward and look around you.

Looking ahead is important. We are taking an important step here today, but it does not stop. In addition to the Norther and Rentel parks, there will be three new parks and also for these, preferably as soon as possible, clarity should be made about their support mechanism. We urge you to soon develop a new support framework for them.

We also ask you to look around you and follow the developments in our neighboring countries closely. We all heard the news from the Netherlands last week that the Borssele wind farm can be built much cheaper than expected. We should also look at this. It turns out to be a worldwide unicum that a wind farm can be built at such low costs. This, of course, raises a number of questions.

We must be critical, but also honest, and we must dare to admit that an international comparison cannot be made simply because the regulations and subsidy systems are fundamentally different from each other. In the Netherlands, for example, we are talking about public procurement, while in Belgium we are working with a system of domain concessions, to which a lot of conditions are connected. I think we should dare to analyze our own system thoroughly and critically.

Mrs. Minister, CD&V will approve this bill but we urge you to look forward and to present the new subsidy mechanisms for future parks to Parliament soon. We also ask you to look at what is happening in this area in our neighboring countries. Finally, we ask you to do what is necessary to avoid excessive subsidisation.

We have already expressed our views in the committee, so I will be brief.

To combat global warming and secure our electricity supply, renewable energy is essential. However, the development of renewable energy should not be done anyway. Advantages and disadvantages in environmental, social and economic terms must be taken into account. Additional costs and other difficulties should be avoided that could lead to a massive rejection of these solutions by the population. The objective of the PS is therefore to enable the development of renewable energy by limiting costs for consumers. In this regard, the bill goes in the right direction.

In 2013, the previous government also carried out a reform to lower the cost of offshore wind turbines. In its 2015 study, CREG highlighted elements that allow for new savings compared to 2013: technological developments improving the performance of turbines, decreasing interest rates allowing producers to finance their projects at lower costs. These objective developments can therefore reduce the cost of offshore support. Therefore, the PS group will vote in favour of this bill.

This bill has a large support in our parliament. This law could be passed without difficulty. Unfortunately, Minister Marghem’s way of working has once again delayed and poisoned parliamentary debates. In November 2015, she published a very detailed press release announcing that the federal government was reforming offshore wind farm subsidies. Then it took almost seven months for a bill to finally be submitted. This long delay has jeopardized the development of offshore wind turbines projects. Producers have been kept in uncertainty, at the risk of seeing investors abandon the construction of new offshore wind turbines.

Then, in the Finance Committee, the Minister tried to get us to swallow, without preparation and in just two hours, amendments to the law-program. Seven months for the government, two hours for the parliament, Madame Marghem, this shows a great contempt for the work of the MPs!

When a reform is needed and urgent, we are always ready to work quickly. But don’t rely on us to vote laws quickly without even having had time to analyze them in depth. This is not our conception of parliamentary work. In the future, I hope you have understood that force passes do not work and that government work does not grow out of it.

There were disruptions in the working method, but also in the communication level. While the federal government, with a lot of hassle, does not stop denouncing the disinformation it would be the victim of, we were entitled to a flagrant crime of disinformation in this case of offshore wind turbines.

Even before this bill was submitted to parliament, the MR and the minister announced on social networks that the reform of the offshore support would bring 55 euros per household. Then we obviously asked ourselves: is it 55 euros per month or per year? We then analyzed the texts and asked the question to the minister and we found that it was actually 55 euros per household, saved over a period of 19 years.

Nineteen years, nothing but that. That’s just over 2 euros a year. And the minister did not neglect to spread this disinformation on social networks. Obviously, you did not find it useful to say otherwise that, over the same 19-year period, the increase in electricity VAT from 6% to 21% will cost consumers on average close to 2,000 euros. In conclusion, I encourage consumers to make accounts and to judge for themselves where disinformation comes from.

I have the pleasure to meet you often in other places of decision making. I appreciate your distribution. Congratulations on your oratory art. You often have the right replica that makes the mouse. But, speaking of flies, can you tell me which flies struck you so that you were attacked to the privacy of our colleague Ms. Karine Lalieux? I don’t think that the parliament wins on that our debates steal at the level of the puppets!

However, I know you very well. I know you very well. I am probably the one who knows you best in this assembly. And I think your verbal aggressiveness comes from the fact that you don’t control your dossier. Madam the Minister, rest assured! Stop your low-level quarrels. Study your files, and you may recover an ounce of credibility, not from the Socialist Party, but from your own majority.

I thank you.

Mr. Speaker, ladies and gentlemen ministers, dear colleagues, the bill that is submitted to us is part of the will of the federal government to protect the interests of consumers without hindering the development of renewable energies, in particular of offshore wind power.

The aim of the government and the majority is to continue our efforts to ⁇ our renewable energy production targets, set at both European and international levels.

What are the benefits for the final consumer? According to CREG estimates, the total cost of support for offshore wind production for the period 2009-2040 is expected to be approximately €16.7 billion, or €18.3 billion if connections are taken into account.

For an average household, the tariff surcharge is currently, with the three parks in operation, at 15 euros per year. The cumulative cost, with the entry into service of the Rentel and Norther parks, is expected to be around 33 euros per year and per household. The project is 45 euros when the last three parks are put into operation.

The decision of the Council of Ministers of 20 November 2015 and the agreement concluded on 8 June 2016 with Rentel and Norther, translated into the bill that is submitted to us, will allow all consumers to save more than one billion euros by 2040. These forecasts will, of course, need to be adjusted according to the negotiations that will be conducted subsequently for the last three wind farms.

The majority chose an objective differentiation criterion, namely the equivalent number of hours in full charge, i.e. the number of hours per year during which wind farms actually produce full-efficient electricity.

Until now, offshore wind farms had a flat-rate remuneration, with a return on investment rate of 12%, a fairly advantageous rate compared to the one in force in other countries.

The European Commission has also raised a number of questions regarding the proposed level of remuneration in relation to neighbouring countries in the pre-notification procedure that had been made. The Minister recalled at this occasion the differences existing between Belgian and foreign legal systems. Thus, most foreign countries conduct a tender, while Belgium has a system that is based on the granting of domestic concessions.

Furthermore, the parameters involved in determining the expected return by investors should not be hidden. In particular, I cite the geographical and geological conditions of the different sites, the size and density of the park, the capital structure, the technological evolution, the risks supported or not by investors, etc. The Minister had the opportunity to come back in detail during the work in committee on these various elements. It confirmed that the royal decree implementing the bill will also be notified to the European Commission.

The proposed reform, which covers the projects of the Norther and Rentel sites, introduces a decrease in the required return on equity: we will increase from 12 to 10.5%. It thus reduces support for production and introduces a levelized cost of energy differentiated by park.

The State Council had questioned the fate of the facilities whose financial closure had already taken place. In order to avoid any contradiction with the Energy Charter, as well as with Articles 10 and 11 of our Constitution, the majority adopted an amendment, supported by some opposition parties, which will allow for a transitional period for installations that have already been the subject of a financial closure between 1 May 2016 and 31 December 2016.

Mr. Speaker, dear colleagues, the main objective of this project is also and above all to avoid a speculative bubble such as that which has developed in recent years in Flanders and Wallonia as part of the support for photovoltaics. Per ⁇ some things need to be put back in place, because in Wallonia this scandal, of which we have talked again recently, which was generated by a whole series of misguided decisions of the olive majority, has cost and will continue to cost a fortune to the citizens.

Thus, according to the CwaPE, the Walloon energy regulator, the overall cost by 2024 will rise to no less than 715 million, which is 65 euros per household. We are far from what the previous speaker said. We must be able to acknowledge here all the mistakes, all the errors of the Wallon government.

Defending the consumer while pursuing our goals in the fight against global warming, these are two goals that, I hope, will allow this bill to gather the broadest possible unanimousness that will lead us, at least at the level of the MR group, to support it!

Ladies ministers, Ladies ministers, Ladies ministers, Ladies and Gentlemen, since the beginning of the legislature, Ladies and Gentlemen, as regards your projects, we clearly welcome this reduction in support to the Norther and Rentel offshore park. Indeed, since 2014, the cost of offshore wind turbines has been reduced and therefore, the support had to be reduced. It is simply good management that reduces this support according to the costs. This is what the final consumer wants.

In recent years, numerous studies have concluded that cost savings ranging from 32% to 46% can be achieved in offshore wind power by 2020. The Swedish Vattenfall has won a tender in Denmark for the construction of Horns Rev 3 at a price of 103 euros/megawatt hour off-line. Since then, there has been a new world record. We have talked about it before. DONG Energy, the world’s leading developer of offshore wind farms, won the Dutch tender for the construction and operation of two parks for 72.70 euros/megawatt hour off-line, over a 15-year period.

The Danish won it against a dozen consortiums mobilized for this highly competitive competition. The price was the only selection criterion with a already very low ceiling of 124 euros/megawatt hour.

Even if this is the case of a tender, it has been mentioned, it is revealing the lower cost of offshore wind power and technological research will ⁇ allow us to go even further. We must, therefore, remain attentive to the future. We still have to conclude three financial clauses for three parks, which I draw the attention of the government.

Furthermore, even if we are in the opposition, we welcome the reduction of the return on equity to 10.5%, a great advance, let’s recognize it, even if it took time to do so: press release in November, decision of 10 June followed by the apocalyptic scenario with the services of the House, an amendment filed at the same time as a bill! This is also a world record, this has not happened before you! You can put it in your Guinness Book when needed.

We all know it! The development of renewable energy has an undeniable financial cost, but it is essential to ensure the energy transition. We need to understand it and explain it to the people. Belgium needs these large investments and we must dare to support them otherwise we will find ourselves stuck with a production park that is already outdated.

During the committee debate, I reminded you that your predecessor had placed a ceiling on the offshore fee for large electricity consumer companies. This measure was welcomed at the time, because it preserved the competitiveness of our companies. Should we not, today, move forward and consider taking more into consideration companies that are not large electricity consumers but yet electricity-intensive? You know that there is a strong pressure to get through this element and I will insist because it is a key element of the competitiveness of our companies and our SMEs.

As a commission, you stated that the government did not intend to integrate this category of SMEs into the downward system that benefits large electricity consumers. Indeed, you said, this strategic measure has a budget impact that the CREG has already assessed in the framework of the calculations relating to the MOG. You accepted – we agreed between us – the idea of communicating us the calculations of the CREG and I therefore expect, once all the procedures are completed, to benefit from full transparency and the said calculations of the commission.

But that is not all. Meanwhile, CREG has published the PwC study, which makes a clear finding on the competitive disadvantage of electrointensive companies. Therefore, Mrs. Minister, will you take steps in their favor to preserve their competitiveness, given their importance in our economic fabric? I have already asked you.

In addition, we have not received any answers regarding the energy standard. That is why I ask you the question: have you made progress in its implementation? It is mentioned in the government agreement, but you are not very talkative about it. I would have liked to know your approach in this area, since you avoided responding in commission.

Furthermore, we do not understand why you announced in an interview that you would like to open these offshore parks to citizens through participation in cooperatives, while unfortunately no provision of this bill relates to this opening. I confess not to grasp, because I hardly see how and when you could demand such an opening after the financial closing, the closing of the financing of parks, which we will adopt today.

In conclusion, you are announcing a federal energy vision before July 21 in a committee meeting on June 14th, and I can deliver the document to you. We are on July 14th and we still haven’t seen anything coming. You can imagine the suspension, Madam the Minister, especially since this deadline is not even mentioned in your note sent to the Energy Commission this Tuesday. Should we deduce that once again, you will not respect your timing? I dare not believe it, you who are so ordered, as everyone knows. Will the deadline that you have imposed be met? This is the last question I wanted to ask you today.

Mr. Calvo was registered as speaker, but as he is absent, I pass the word to the government.

My speech will be very brief.

I would like to thank you for your extensive support for this text. Indeed, it allows us to meet our international obligations in terms of renewable energy percentage in our energy mix, at least for what will be developed by 2020.

We will be very attentive, and I will respond in this way to a few interventions, to the support we will negotiate for the last three parks.

Furthermore, the CREG is reviewing the particular situation of each of these projects in view of the tender recently awarded in the Netherlands. Through a form of cross-analysis and benchmarking, this really allows us to have the finest and most up-to-date analyses to be able to configure this support to the lowest, while ⁇ ining an incentive to invest in those energies that carry a share of industrial risks. Indeed, even if they are more performing, as underlined by Mr. de Lamotte, there is still, in this context, an industrial situation that is not yet at full maturity.

As the bankers told us, the decline on these investments being about seven years, while these contracts are concluded for double or even triple (in the Netherlands, 15 years; in Belgium, 19 years), they do not yet have the necessary visibility to be able to drastically reduce the elements that make up the financial assembly that serves investors to deploy these investments.

We hope to continue in good conditions. As soon as the procedures are completed, I will submit the analysis done by the CREG within the framework of the Modular Offshore Grid (MOG), i.e. of the sea-taking in relation to all categories of consumers, thus allowing you to refine with me the reading that one can have of the impact that these energies have and the support that they are granted to the different categories of end consumers.

Mr. Minister, I hear well your response in relation to a project which, you will understand, does not make difficulty. I still remain with my three questions about the energy standard, the possibility of opening the wind fields to civil cooperatives and the timing on the energy pact or rather the federal vision of the energy pact. I remain with these three questions. I am going to spend my holidays in doubt. This is a question point that you put weight on the debates.