• Energy Research

In the Mediterranean area most of the public authorities need to enhance their institutional capacity in the field of Energy Efficiency (EE) and use of Renewable Energy Sources (RES) in order to contribute to the Energy Performance of Buildings and the Energy Efficiency Directives, developing solutions suited to various regional contexts. The PrioritEE project, funded by the Interreg MED programme, aims at reinforcing the capacities of public administrations in selecting and implementing eco-friendly and cost-effective energy planning measures. This paper aims to describe the main efforts carried out by local public authorities and professional institutions from five MED countries (Italy, Portugal, Spain, Greece and Croatia) in order to reduce energy consumption and prioritize EE investments in Municipal Public Buildings (MPBs). In particular, it focuses on the methodological framework describing the main components of the proposed toolbox, the main objectives and expected outcomes but also the current achievements and the way forward.

Schools4energy is a laboratory of sustainable experimentation for the implementation of good practices that aims to promote conscious and virtuous energy behaviours and energy efficiency in the schools. The activities, developed in the framework of the INTERREG MED PrioritEE project, involve the students, the teachers and the staff personnel of Primary and Lower Secondary Schools of the Municipality of Potenza. The Schools4energy laboratory is made up of three integrated modules (School race, Artists for energy, Energy at stake) based on different methodologies (analytical methods, co-creation and gamification) in order to increase the interest and the involvement of students and enhance their preferences and talents. The proposed activities pursue multiple objectives: to increase students’ knowledge and skills on energy, to raise awareness on energy consumption, to encourage energy consumption reduction, to promote behavioural changes.

Cities are gaining prominence committing to respond to the threat of climate change, e.g., by developing local climate plans or strategies. However, little is known regarding the approaches and processes of plan development and implementation, or the success and effectiveness of proposed measures. Mainstreaming is regarded as one approach associated with (implementation) success, but the extent of integration of local climate policies and plans in ongoing sectoral and/or development planning is unclear. This paper analyses 885 cities across the 28 European countries to create a first reference baseline on the degree of climate mainstreaming in local climate plans. This will help to compare the benefits of mainstreaming versus dedicated climate plans, looking at policy effectiveness and ultimately delivery of much needed climate change efforts at the city level. All core cities of the European Urban Audit sample were analyzed, and their local climate plans classified as dedicated or mainstreamed in other local policy initiatives. It was found that the degree of mainstreaming is low for mitigation (9% of reviewed cities; 12% of the identified plans) and somewhat higher for adaptation (10% of cities; 29% of plans). In particular horizontal mainstreaming is a major effort for local authorities; an effort that does not necessarily pay off in terms of success of action implementation. This study concludes that climate change issues in local municipalities are best tackled by either, developing a dedicated local climate plan in parallel to a mainstreamed plan or by subsequently developing first the dedicated and later a mainstreaming plan (joint or subsequent “dual track approach”). Cities that currently provide dedicated local climate plans (66% of cities for mitigation; 26% of cities for adaptation) may follow-up with a mainstreaming approach. This promises effective implementation of tangible climate actions as well as subsequent diffusion of climate issues into other local sector policies. The development of only broad sustainability or resilience strategies is seen as critical.

The evidence of relationships between climate change induced by greenhouse gases of anthropogenic origin, and energy-economic issues (inappropriate use of fossil fuels and technologies, uncertainty in fuels price and demand trends, etc.) asks for the adoption of a holistic approach in order to re-orient the anthropogenic activities' system towards a configuration that harmonizes environmental protection, economic growth and security of energy supply. In this framework, energy system sustainability represents one of the major challenge the EU is facing and its implementation passes through a path of coordinate actions carried out by local governments in which objectives of sustainable development become integral part of strategic programming. The aim of this research is to provide local administrations with an analytical support tool to guide key strategic decisions in energy and climate planning on the medium-long term, assessing the possible role of local energy systems in the achievement of sustainable objectives at national/European scale. This paper focuses on the implementation of a partial equilibrium TIMES-generated model in a real case study, the regional energy system of Basilicata region (Southern Italy). First, it describes the adopted methodology. Second, it is provided a step-by-step description and characterisation of the reference energy system and the model's data input which represents the first step for an in-depth knowledge of the present energy system on which to build effective and sustainable local energy and climate plans.

The Paris Agreement aims to limit global mean temperature rise this century well below 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels. This target has wide-ranging implications for Europe and its cities, which are the source of substantial proportions of greenhouse gas emissions. This paper reports the state of planning for climate change by collecting and analysing local climate mitigation and adaptation plans across 885 urban areas of the EU-28. A typology and analysis framework was developed that classifies local climate plans in terms of their spatial (alignment with local, national and international policy) and sectoral integration (alignment into existing local policy documents). We document local climate plans that we call type A1: non-compulsory by national law and not developed as part of international climate networks ; A2: compulsory by national law and not developed as part of international networks ; A3: plans developed as part of international networks. This most comprehensive analysis to date reveals that there is large diversity in the availability of local climate plans with most being available in Central and Northern European cities. Approximately 66% of EU cities have an A1, A2, or A3 mitigation plan, 26% an adaptation plan, 17% joint adaptation and mitigation plans, and about 30% lack any form of local climate plan (i.e. what we classify as A1, A2, A3 plans). Mitigation plans are more numerous than adaptation plans, but mitigation does not always precede adaptation. Our analysis reveals that city size, national legislation, and international networks can influence the development of local climate plans. We found that size does matter as about 70% of the cities above 1 million inhabitants have a comprehensive and stand-alone mitigation and/or an adaptation plan (A1 or A2). Countries with national climate legislation (A2), such as Denmark, France, Slovakia and the United Kingdom, are found to have nearly twice as many urban mitigation plans, and five times more likely to produce urban adaptation plans, than countries without such legislation. A1 and A2 mitigation plans are particularly numerous in Denmark, Poland, Germany, and Finland ; while A1 and A2 adaptation plans are prevalent in Denmark, Finland, UK and France. The integration of adaptation and mitigation is country-specific and can mainly be observed in countries where local climate plans are compulsory, especially in France and the UK. Finally, local climate plans of international climate networks (A3) are mostly found in the many countries where autonomous, i.e. A1 plans are less common. The findings reported here are of international importance as they will inform and support decision-making and thinking of stakeholders with similar experiences or developments at all levels and sectors in other regions around the world.