34 Table 2. Targets by sector
Sector Responsible ministry
Energy saving target per annum
Built environment Housing, Communities and Integration
2.4 Manufacturing
Economic Affairs 1.7
Agriculture Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality
2.4 Transport
Transport, Public Works and Water Management
1.7 Source: official comment by the Ministry of VROM, 28 June 2010
As expectations and responsibilities were not specifically agreed and documented, it has been unclear in recent years which ministry was
responsible for taking additional measures to make up for the disappointing results. According to the then Clean and Efficient
programme managers at the Ministry of VROM, the line ministries were responsible for proposing and costing additional policy. The policy officers
at the line ministries thought that the coordinator at the Ministry of VROM was responsible for initiating new policy and that they themselves could
decide on its implementation and funding. Owing to this uncertainty, not all line ministries took appropriate action when the savings in their
sector were below target.
2.1.4 Feasibility of the 2 target
Feasibility studies carried out for the Ministers of VROM and EZ in recent years show that an energy saving rate of about 1.6 per annum
18
could be achieved at relatively low cost to society Daniëls Farla, 2006b, pp.
6-7 and p. 35. They concluded that achieving the last little bit the remaining 0.4 would be disproportionately expensive Daniëls Farla,
2006a. One of the studies found that a package of technical measures could reduce energy consumption by up to 720 PJ Daniëls Farla,
2006a, p. 53. This potential is equal to about 2.3 per annum. However, the cost of the final 60
PJ would exceed €200 million per PJ while the cost of the first 660 PJ would be €25 million or less per PJ. For the calculation,
the researchers assumed that 80 of the total technical potential energy saving would actually be achieved Daniëls Farla, 2006b, p. 46. This
means, for example, that double glazing would be placed in 80 of all houses where it was technically possible. This would require very broad
support throughout society. Later calculations also found that the 2 per annum energy saving target as from 2010 would be just about feasible
but would be far more expensive and difficult than a slightly lower saving of 1.8, possibly as much as €3 billion for a 2 saving against €0.3
18
This percentage does not include the use of feedstocks see also section 2.3.2.
35
billion for a 1.8 saving Menkveld Wijngaart, 2007, p. 20. According to the researchers themselves, however, these calculations are very
sensitive to the assumptions made on the saving potential.
19
2.2 Results in 1995-2007
Actual annual energy saving rate In 1995-2007 the average energy saving achieved in the Netherlands was
1.1 per annum. In 2000-2007 the average energy saving was 0.8 per annum Gerdes Boonekamp, 2009; Netherlands Environmental
Assessment Agency, 2009. In the preceding period 1995 –2000 the rate
had been higher: about 1.4 on average per annum Boonekamp et al., 2004a. As can be seen from figure 3, the actual saving rate throughout
the entire 1995-2007 period with the exception of 1999 was lower than the policy target applicable at the time.
Figure 3 National targets and actual savings, 1995-2007
The Energy Research Centre of the Netherlands ECN calculates the actual energy saving each year on behalf of the Ministry of EZ under the
auspices of the Energy Saving Monitoring Platform.
20
For methodological reasons, the saving is calculated and presented in two ways: as an
average over an increasing number of years since a reference date and a s
19
According to the report cited, a slightly more generous estimate of the saving potential in the transport sector would reduce the estimated cost to €2 billion.
20
This platform is made up of ECN, NL Agency, the Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency and Statistics Netherlands.
