“It is totally wrong to argue that any rebates or rebates, legitimate state aid given to energy-intensive industries, are passed on to the consumer,” says a member of the Industrial Consumers’ Energy Consortium (EBICEN). He stresses that energy-intensive industries support exports and keep jobs stable and considers the problem of “oligopolies worse than the state monopoly!”
This is his answer-reaction to our questions, why the costs of energy-intensive industry are passed on to consumers and what are the problems his area is currently facing. Let’s look at its rationale in detail, with which most of EBIKEN’s members agree: “The total consumption of energy-intensive industries is 7 TWH with a total consumption of 51.5 TWH – only 13.5%. The household consumption profile is peaked, at the peak of the system from 18.00 to 22.00, due to the photovoltaic system problem becomes even bigger. In other words, while the production decreases with sunset, the load increases while the industrial is either fixed or flexible (for example, non-working steelworks where the current value is expensive).
The home consumer account is indeed high due to the high regulated charges (end-up for Renewable Energy Sources of 900 million per year and finally SGI 800 million per year) which are mainly borne by the simple consumer. For RES, very high guaranteed prices were given when the technology was immature, and for the islands – for obvious reasons – there were interests that did not want to be connected to the system but to consume oil and fuel oil. ”
Delay of Measures
Eviken circles say that “at European level, methodologies have been adopted in recent years to support energy-intensive industries in order to remain competitive and remain in Europe and reduce some charges such as RES, pollutant charging, excise duty exemption etc .; Greece is following its implementation with a marked delay.
These measures constitute state aid, given by the central government’s money from the sale of pollutants and not burdening the consumer.
Also, one understands that energy-intensive industries maintain stable jobs, support exports. It is obvious that if European governments support industry and we do not, the Greek industry will close.
It is also false that the energy-intensive industry is not modern and not profitable. Always energy costs were important for the big industry. So, with the exception of Larko, which was state-owned, the rest of the industry (aluminum, steel, cement) has constantly invested in modernization and energy saving, so it has withstood the crisis. ”
For what is the position of PPC, RAE and the state bodies in charge of the energy-intensive industry, the Eviken executive believes that “the development of an industrial policy concerns only the government. Clearly there is a deficit over time. Any measures decided at European level (reduction of the RES fee) are delayed. State monopolies (PPCs) perceive the rigidity of the large industry and their inability to find an alternative supplier and are trying to increase their revenue over time in this category where they have no competition. The role of RAE, which is not as independent as it should, is to control monopolies if they respect the supply code, but also the legislator if it violates the laws. A prime example: When the government, under pressure from the PSCs / DEPs that lost their monopoly, gave triple-digit revenues for 16 months until RAE approved final tariffs. ”
However, he adds, “there is something even worse than the state monopoly (PPC, DEPA), the oligopoly that attempts to support the electricity market by trying to manipulate the market with a series of distortions and subsidies to private producers. Typical is the delay in the operation of the new market and the attempt to maintain distortions in favor of private producers.
The government must proceed with the immediate implementation of any measures decided at European level in favor of industry, e.g. the measure of interpenetration, and to ensure the functioning of a competitive market without distortions, according to the target model that is a European priority, as well as the direct functioning of the connection of the Greek market with the neighboring countries “(bridging it is in fact the possibility of the UHMO to interrupt and even limit the electrification of the industrial units whenever it deems necessary for the stability of the country’s electrical system. price at the auction).
Absence of Conciliation
Closing our discussion with him, we asked him how much he helps or hits the gas emission market the energy-intensive industry. His answer:
“The increase in the price of CO2 pollutants is a tool to continue financing the development of RES at European level. Each government for this purpose receives free allowances for pollutants, which it sells to support the development of RES in each country. In Greece, the total footprint in tonnes of CO2 per MWh produced is higher than in other European countries due to poor quality lignite and old low-efficiency units.
Consequently, competitive lignite is a burden, because the charges to the simple consumer can not be increased is a huge problem of viability for PPC. Should the state budget bear costs eg islands or RES and not the simple consumer (yes, but otherwise it will return the cost to the consumer, anyway). Obviously, the Greek industry has experienced a 20% increase only in 2018, for the additional reason of not having agreed with PPC to agree on hedging – technical cover against the capital losses that may arise as a result of unexpected movements of the market), with industry taking the cost. ”
“The Real Cost” of Hydrocarbons
The “real cost of oil”, from (possibly) multiple leakages in the country, would exceed € 7.6 billion in nominal terms, ie about 4% of current national GDP, according to an economic study by WWF Hellas for hydrocarbon mines in Greece. The main purpose of the study, the assessment of the impact of a major accident in Greece (Crete, Ionian, Epirus, Peloponnese, Western Greece, Anatolia-Thrace, Central Macedonia) on key sectors – for the national economy – , fisheries and the wider labor market: Due to the size of tourist income in Crete and the Ionian Sea, a serious leak / pollution incident in Crete alone could cause a loss of € 2.2 billion – a similar incident in the Ionian Sea , damage of the order of 1 , € 78 billion over 25 years. Almost 45,000 jobs directly and indirectly linked to tourism would be lost by a serious leakage / pollution incident in Crete and nearly 25,000 jobs from a similar incident in the Ionian Sea. Even if there is no significant leakage event, the negative impact on the economy is 0.8-1.3 billion euros over a 25 year period. Losses in the fisheries sector (from marine ecosystem pollution) could reach € 180 million “.