The Energy Strategy of the Basque Country 2020 states that the global energy model is not sustainable in the medium and long term. I should like to deal with the reasons.

The Euskadi 2020 Energy Strategy report reflects the reflections of different international organizations and points out that, according to the data provided, we have an energy model that needs a profound review in the world. Three main reasons are: on the one hand, the rise in fossil fuel prices, with a great economic impact; on the other hand, the low security of supply offered by the countries with the greatest energy reserves; and, on the other hand, the emission of greenhouse gases, which are unsustainable both in current volume and in anticipated quantity.

All this must inevitably lead us to the governments, and especially those of the most advanced countries, making a responsible reflection on the fundamentals of their energy model. The result of this reflection should be the reduction of the use of fossil fuels for the benefit of renewable sources and the definitive consolidation of a culture of saving, efficiency and rational use in all social actors.

We will have to resort to other energy models. Will these models allow the current rate of consumption to be maintained? Should measures be taken to reduce consumption? I am referring to tough measures, not just campaigns to reduce unnecessary spending or increase efficiency. In other words: The European 20-20 strategy provides for a 20% reduction in energy consumption. Is an efficiency improvement enough to reach it?

New energy policies must be based on the reduction of fossil energy consumption. There is still ample scope for the consumer sector to consume less. There are also a large number of technological resources that make it possible to make better use of renewable energies and which are currently not fully developed. And there is no doubt that in the future, thanks to the development of technology, we will be able to have more sustainable energy alternatives.

As regards the total reduction of energy requirements, it should be noted that the result of the energy models is the structural changes that remain in the medium and long term. The shift to a less intensive industry, the change in people's consumption habits, the implementation of another use of energy... are based on education and awareness. Economic and social changes require a great deal of effort and long-term policies.

Finally, the EU’s 20-20 efficiency strategy aims to: That by 2020 total primary energy consumption [total energy available in nature before being transformed for use] is 20% lower than in 2005. According to the information available in the EU, savings and efficiency measures have not been sufficient so far and additional measures have therefore to be taken. These measures are mainly included in the Energy Efficiency Directive adopted in September 2012, which provides for a period of eighteen months for Member States to transpose them into their legislation. However, it should be borne in mind that the EU Member States do not have binding targets for energy efficiency by 2020.

Substitution of oil is particularly difficult in transport. Is the electric car viable to replace all the cars now circulating on the roads?

Transport, by road, by air or by sea, is heavily dependent on oil. One of the objectives is to reduce this dependence. The initiative for the use of biofuels, in addition to having limitations, is not proving very successful. Concerned about the situation, the European Commission has promoted a debate on the other type of energy for transport, and electricity and natural gas seem to be the most viable. In any case, structural change for any type of vehicle will take place in the long term. It is difficult to conceive that a significant proportion of existing vehicles can be replaced by alternative vehicles in the short and medium term.

The International Energy Agency (IEA) describes three possible situations (the current, the new policies and the so-called 450). Where are we going?

NEA presented three scenarios in 2010: one is the one that would suppose maintaining current energy policies, another is the ideal scenario called “scenario 450”. The latter would allow the increase in the temperature of the planet not to exceed two degrees by the end of the century. The third, that of the “new policies”, is among the previous two and is established after the failure to reach a binding agreement in Copenhagen. This is an intermediate scenario, with more stringent policies than the current ones. Several energy-intensive countries (USA, China, Russia, European Union, Brazil, Japan...) have taken additional measures to reduce their CO2 emissions. New measures to improve energy efficiency have also been announced in the last year. However, progress is slow and obstacles to economically viable measures need to be removed. In this sense, NEA presented a new scenario in 2012. Under the name of “efficient world”, it is based on exploiting the existing potential in efficiency, facilitating universal access to modern technologies. In this scenario, the increase in temperature on Earth would be limited to three degrees.

Over the past two years, two sources of energy have generated many debates: nuclear and non-conventional hydrocarbons. What do you think?

The Fukushima accident has led to a review of nuclear policy in several EU countries. Japan is questioning its commitment to nuclear power and only one of the 50 reactors it currently has is working. France has also entered the group of countries that intend to reduce the use of nuclear energy. This type of energy is being questioned in Canada and the United States, where electricity generation through natural gas is cheaper. It appears that nuclear energy is becoming less important than other forms of energy (natural gas, coal, wind and solar).

With regard to non-conventional hydrocarbons, the overall view is that the increase in US production is increasing the gap with natural gas prices in Europe and Asia. Moreover, the lower cost of gas makes the cost of electricity supply for the industry more competitive. All of this is transforming world energy trade. In the states of the European Union, on the contrary, there are different positions on the use of hydraulic fracture. Some, such as the United Kingdom and Poland, are keen to exploit this type of resource, while others, such as France, have imposed the moratorium.

[Spain] The Environmental Assessment Bill is being drafted in the State. In this sense, projects requiring the use of hydraulic fracture should overcome an environmental impact study. In the Basque Country, previous analyses indicate the possibility of obtaining unconventional gas. The technical, economic and environmental conditions of this type of resource should be investigated.

In short, what should be the medium-term energy scenario?

The focus on energy in the world is changing, depending on policy. The increase in gas production in EE.UU, including the great development of unconventional production, the sustained growth of renewables (wind, solar) that may have a promising future, increasing awareness to mitigate the impact of high energy prices, the risk of closing nuclear plants in some countries... They're all changing the energy landscape. However, the process of change is slow and the effort to bring the global energy system on a more sustainable path continues to fail, as fossil fuels remain the owneros.En this context, the strategy of countries with scarce energy resources and a high dependence on fossil fuels
must be to reduce energy needs. This means that companies must continue to increase their energy efficiency, that public administrations must commit to sustainable energy, that consumer habits must be changed for a more rational use of energy and that investment must be made in the most efficient and sustainable technologies available.