With the “Clean Energy Package for All Europeans” (CEP) the EU legislator envisions consumers to “take ownership of the energy transition and to benefit from new technologies”. While this promises an empowered role of consumers, not all consumers will be able to participate as “owners of the energy transition” and subsequently suffer from being in a disadvantageous position in the market. This essentially bears the risk of an unjust energy transition. The CEP foresees “community energy”, i.e. “citizen energy communities” (CEC), to facilitate “certain groups of household customers to participate in the electricity markets, who otherwise might not have been able to do so.” This would imply that CEC not only fulfil an empowering function for consumers to participate in the market, but also a protective function, in particular for vulnerable customers. However, this protective element is not enshrined in the definition of CEC, but is left at the discretion of the Member States. This article explores the role and need of CEC not only as empowering measure, but especially as a vehicle for a just energy transition in the EU and identifies minimum legal requirements for CEC to sufficiently fulfil this function.
This article explains how the Railroad Commission of Texas became the world’s most prominent oil and gas regulator and how it can become the world’s role model again. It explains how the Railroad Commission built the world’s modern oil and gas industry by stopping oil and gas waste and ensuring stable prices. And it describes the crisis now facing the industry—overproduction of oil and gas is wasting resources that will be worth more in the future. The United States is emerging from the biggest oil and gas boom that the world has ever seen, and its production now dwarfs that of any other country. Texas now produces far more oil than any other state, and more than any Middle Eastern country other than Saudi Arabia. As a result, the eyes of the global oil industry are again on Texas. The article lays out an agenda for rebuilding a world-class oil and gas regulator, explaining how better data and smart limits can protect both the economy and the environment. This paper will be part of the OGEL Special Issue on “Law and Policy for Gas Flaring in a Low-carbon Economy. More information here: https://www.ogel.org/news.asp?key=660
The recent large-scale offshore oil discoveries in Guyana hold the promise of lucrative economic opportunities for the country and its citizens, including its indigenous population. Comprising roughly 10 percent of the total population, indigenous peoples in Guyana are no strangers to extractive industries, such as mining and logging. While much scholarly and political effort is turned to the identification of good regulatory and fiscal governance of the newly discovered resources, little attention has been granted to safeguarding the rights of indigenous peoples in Guyana in light of these new extractive activities. This paper identifies and analyses the relevant domestic and international legal provisions on indigenous rights and natural resources, with a particular emphasis on mining and development of offshore resources. It argues that the current legal framework in Guyana does not rise to international standards and that the procedural rights of indigenous peoples must be respected in all decision-making regarding the new offshore oil boom.
The author aims to present the broadest possible context of the Baltic Pipe project, including legal, and to some extent, economic considerations, which ought to be scrutinized along with the broader geopolitical considerations surrounding present energy-related race in Baltic Sea. The aim is to juxtapose the long-lasting Russo-German strategic partnership resting on the development of Nord Stream(s) pipeline surpassing Poland on the one side, with a collection of pipe-dream moves ushered by Washington and aimed at upending this partnership, the Baltic Pipe project included, on the other side. Sec 2 looks at the Nord Stream(s) project as the direct competitor of the Baltic Pipe, and at the efforts by both the US government and the EU institutions to undermine Russo-German co-operation, thereby helping the viability of the Baltic Pipe. The discussion of the Nord Stream(s) covers US’ attempts to torpedo the Nord Stream2 with sanctions imposed in December 2019 (sec 2.1) and the EU’s crusade against the Nord Stream via blocking the full capacity use of the OPAL pipeline since 2009 (sec 2.2). Sec 3 looks at the US’s and Germany’s energy strategies toward the CEE, including the energy dimension of the US-led Three Seas Initiative (sec 3.1), which favour the Baltic Pipe project, and Germany’s Energiewende which is at odds with this project (sec 3.2). Secs 4 and 5 look at drivers for advancing the Baltic Pipe, which stem from the structure Poland’s electricity-generation market (sec 4) combined with Poland’s EU and international climate and emissions-related commitments (sec 5), which all force a country-wide shift to electricity-generation from natural gas. Section 6 looks at the Yamal Contract, which will secure gas supplies to Poland until it tentatively expires in 2022, and those supplies are entirely replaced with gas supplied via the Baltic Pipe. Finally, sec 7 looks at the regulatory issues, including the intergovernmental agreement on the Baltic Pipe (sec 7.1), funding of the project along with granted state aid (sec 7.2), and the permitting process (sec 7.3).
