But there is an excuse for the delay. The discussions are very complicated. The main issue is of course burdene sharing of both the emissions reduction targets for 2020 and the renewable energy targets. No figures have leaked out yet, but when they do, they are bound to make a lot of noise.

A more technical discussion is also happening however, concerning the trade of renewable energy certificates in Europe. This issue evokes strongreactions from  parties active in the sustainable energy market. That Member States are quarreling about mandatory trade versus feed-in systems is not new. But this discussion is also making it clear that traders and generators have completely different perspectives. Even within one company, traders and producers of renewable energy are diametrically opposed to each other. Hence the Board, together with the department of Corporate Communication, has to determine what is the best approach for the company as a whole, and communicate that view to its stakeholders.

Both traders and generators want to make a healthy profit. However, apart from this, their views on the renewable energy market are quite different. Producers of renewable energy, project developers and manufacturers of equipment want to enlarge their market as quickly as possible. They seek to optimise their projects and are often satisfied to have identified another feasible project, successfully obtained  the financing and then achieved  a profit as well. But the main driver for traders, however, is to optimise their profit, while meeting renewable energy targets for their buyers.

Traders and producers fully agree that free trade will be necessary in a maturing market. Everybody also agrees that a full-scale free market can not be introduced within a few years. However, most existing national systems are simply not designed to cope with a full free trade market. So restrictions to free trade will inevitably be part of the Commission’s proposals.

By postponing the new RE Directive to at least January 2008, the European Commission has bought itself (again) some extra time for  negotiation. In March this year, President Barroso was still promising that the legislative package would be published just after summer 2007.

But there is an excuse for the delay. The discussions are very complicated. The main issue is of course burdene sharing of both the emissions reduction targets for 2020 and the renewable energy targets. No figures have leaked out yet, but when they do, they are bound to make a lot of noise.

A more technical discussion is also happening however, concerning the trade of renewable energy certificates in Europe. This issue evokes strongreactions from  parties active in the sustainable energy market. That Member States are quarreling about mandatory trade versus feed-in systems is not new. But this discussion is also making it clear that traders and generators have completely different perspectives. Even within one company, traders and producers of renewable energy are diametrically opposed to each other. Hence the Board, together with the department of Corporate Communication, has to determine what is the best approach for the company as a whole, and communicate that view to its stakeholders.

Both traders and generators want to make a healthy profit. However, apart from this, their views on the renewable energy market are quite different. Producers of renewable energy, project developers and manufacturers of equipment want to enlarge their market as quickly as possible. They seek to optimise their projects and are often satisfied to have identified another feasible project, successfully obtained  the financing and then achieved  a profit as well. But the main driver for traders, however, is to optimise their profit, while meeting renewable energy targets for their buyers.

Traders and producers fully agree that free trade will be necessary in a maturing market. Everybody also agrees that a full-scale free market can not be introduced within a few years. However, most existing national systems are simply not designed to cope with a full free trade market. So restrictions to free trade will inevitably be part of the Commission’s proposals.

Combining the best of both worlds will be the European Commission’s challenge over the next two months. The Commission will have to define a roadmap that leads from the present situation to a future internal market for green energy. This implies: a perfect timing of subsequent steps, setting intermediate targets until 2020, defining criteria for Guarantees of Origin or certificates. If the discussion will be restricted to timing, targets and criteria, traders and generators might be on constructive ‘speaking terms’ again.

Rolf de Vos

Editor in chief

GreenPrices

r.devos@greenprices.com