€5 billion of EU energy efficiency project money spent on “comfort”

Press conference by Harald Wögerbauer, Member of the European Court of Auditors (on the left), on the cost-effectiveness of Cohesion Policy investments in energy efficiency. (EC Audiovisual Services)

Press conference by Harald Wögerbauer, Member of the European Court of Auditors (on the left), on the cost-effectiveness of Cohesion Policy investments in energy efficiency. (EC Audiovisual Services)

The European Commission does not spare big words and photographic opportunities for Commissioners, whenever launching a new initiative or securing political agreement for a regulation. And they are doing this all the time. It seems like they spent all their energy and resources in conceiving new rules on everything. And of course they always need more personnel to write down all those new proposals.

What about results? Very rarely we see announcements about the results achieved after some years of application of a certain regulation. It will be a very interesting subject even for a PhD degree research, to count how many new rules, initiatives and spending programmes the Commission is announcing every year and how many debriefings on the achievements or the failures of the old ones are being organised in the Berlaymont building. Thank God there is the European Court of Auditors (ECA) which monitors regularly all EU legislation that entails spending of EU taxpayers’ money.

Energy efficiency

Incidentally it was yesterday 14 January 2013 when the ECA announced the findings of its audits on energy efficiency projects in a number of EU member states, which cost €5 billion. Of course the Brussels Commission had approved everything and all those “investments” were realised according to the rules set by the relevant EU legislation, introduced and monitored by the Commission.

What was the outcome of all those costly projects? Let the ECA speak: “EU Energy Efficiency investment targets not achieved; average pay back period exceeds 50 years (in extreme cases 150 years)”.

There is more on that from the ECA:”…the European Union, through its Cohesion Policy funds, spent almost €5 billion for co-financing energy efficiency measures in the Member States. The European Commission and the Member States are both responsible for the sound financial management of these funds…The Court found that the projects selected by Member State authorities for financing did not have rational objectives in terms of cost-effectiveness, i.e. cost per unit of energy saved. Their objectives were to save energy and improve comfort, but they were not selected for financing on the basis of their potential to produce financial benefits through energy savings, but rather that the buildings were typically regarded as being ‘ready’ for funding, if they were in need of refurbishment and their documentation complied with the requirements”.

Mind you the “documentation complied with the requirements”, says the Court’s auditor, so the responsibility lies entirely on the Commission side, because it was its services that wrote down those requirements and approved their application.

The Press Release of the ECA fortunately found a place in the Europa>Newsroom internet location, but understandably there were no celebrations by the co-responsible Commissioner Günther Oettinger.

More projects

On the other hand this last Commission member dully celebrated some time ago the political agreement on the new Energy Efficiency Directive. He must have been very proud of it. Commissioners are always proud in announcements. He made however no reference to what had happened to €5bn of European taxpayers’ money, which was used not for energy efficiency projects as it was planned by the Commission, but rather to “improve comfort”. Seemingly the EU Commission is always seduced by comfort.

The ECA however doesn’t stop here. Its Press Release continues as follows: ““None of the projects we looked at had a needs assessment or even an analysis of the energy savings potential in relation to investments”, said Harald Wögerbauer, the ECA member responsible for the report, “The Member States were essentially using this money to refurbish public buildings while energy efficiency was, at best, a secondary concern.”

And all that with the seal of the Brussels Commission, otherwise there would have being no disbursement of funds. It is an appalling fact, the ECA to have found that €5bn had being spent on “comfort” and “refurbishments”, totally outside the scope of the programme they meant to finance and the European Commission did nothing to change this.

That kind of money is a good part of the annual EU budget and actually they went down the drain. Is it possible that nobody can be held responsible for that? It might not be a penal case but aren’t there some internal rules in the Commission’s statutes for the waste of €5bn?

 

Advertising

Advertising

Advertising

Advertising

Advertising

Advertising

Advertising

Advertising

Advertising

the European Sting Milestones

Featured Stings

How to build a more resilient and inclusive global system

Stopping antimicrobial resistance would cost just USD 2 per person a year

Somalia: UN urges steps to ensure future elections not ‘marred’ by rights abuses seen in recent polls

A Sting Exclusive: EU Commission’s Vice President Šefčovič accentuates the importance of innovation to EU’s Energy Union

Eurozone stagnates after exporting its recession to trading partners

These 4 trends are shaping the future of your job

Rehn ready to sacrifice part of the real economy

JADE visits Lithuanian Junior Initiatives

Nigeria: Top UN officials say more support needed to ease humanitarian crisis and rebuild lives in conflict-ravaged north-east

UN’s Grandi slams ‘toxic language of politics’ aimed at refugees, migrants

Rohingya refugee shelters ‘washed away’ in Bangladesh monsoon rains: UN agency

Brexit: reciprocal visa-free access for EU and UK nationals

Migration crisis update: What are the chances of a fair deal at this EU Summit?

Trump enrages the Europeans and isolates the US in G7

Here’s how drone delivery will change the face of global logistics

Brexit: No deal without marginalizing the hard Tory Eurosceptic MPs

Britain, EU take edgy steps to unlock Brexit talks as the war of words rages

The mother of all fights about inflation, growth and banks

Why the West supports the yen’s devaluation and Japanese over-indebtedness

David Cameron’s formal letter/threat that officially opens pandora’s box for the UK

How we overhauled healthcare amid Venezuela’s crisis

Millions at risk if Syria’s war moves to last redoubt of Idlib, warns senior aid official

Dramatic funding shortages a ‘severe catastrophe’ for people of Gaza: UN Coordinator

UNESCO experts ready to assist reconstruction of iconic Notre Dame, following devastating blaze

Making technology work for 1.3 billion Indians

State of the Union 2017: Juncker’s optimism about EU growth and Brexit’s impact

UN rights experts call on Russia to release Ukrainian film-maker whose life is in ‘imminent danger’

UN chief urges peaceful, free and fair elections in Cameroon

Venezuela: ‘A worrying destabilizing factor in the region’, Bachelet tells Human Rights Council

Italy solves the enigma of growth with fiscal consolidation: The Banking Union

Eurozone: How can 200 banks find €400 billion?

EU Budget 2019: focus on the young, on migration and innovation

The MH17 tragedy to put a tombstone on Ukrainian civil war

As the Universal Declaration of Human Rights turns 70 – is it time for a new approach?

Does hosting a World Cup make economic sense?

Ambassador Zhang wishes from Brussels great success and prosperity for the China-EU relations in the Year of the Dog

How to build a paradise for women. A lesson from Iceland

Australia now has 25 million people. Will it choose to keep growing?

Earth already has a perfect recycling system. So why not use it?

Radioactive nuclear waste is a global threat. These scientists may have a new solution

Eurozone: Even good statistics mean deeper recession

Is Eurozone preparing to abandon austerity and stagnation?

How revealing the cost of coal makes us all better off

At last some rules on banks

“The Arctic climate matters: to what degree?”, a Sting Exclusive co-authored by UN Environment’s Jan Dusik and Slava Fetisov

‘Open, cordial, and frank discussions’ held over future Somalia-UN relationship

EU-US trade agreement talks to be affected by American bugs

Japanese law professor elected new judge at the International Court of Justice

Mining the deep seabed will harm biodiversity. We need to talk about it

Half of Eurozone in deflation expecting salvation from monetary measures

Why the 33,000 staff European Commission did not have a real contingency plan for the refugee crisis?

ILO discusses world of work response to global refugee crisis

Mediterranean migrant drownings should spur greater action by European countries, urge UN agencies

To my Chinese friend

Protests, violence in Haiti prompts international call for ‘realistic and lasting solutions’ to crisis

Higher education becoming again a privilege of the wealthy?

AIESEC Vlog

Combatting terrorism: EP special committee calls for closer EU cooperation

Deutsche Bank slammed by the US-based trio of IMF, Fed and Moody’s

Yemen: Major UN aid boost for ‘up to 14 million’ as country risks becoming a land of ‘living ghosts’

Ethiopia will soon introduce visa-free travel for all Africans

Capital Markets Union: Making it easier for insurers to invest in the real economy

More Stings?

Speak your Mind Here

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s