In 1997 the E.U.-15 member states set themselves the task of doubling Europe’s renewable energy sources from 6 percent to 12 percent by 2010. A decade later, even though the contribution from renewable sources had increased in absolute terms by 55 percent, the E.U.’s new Renewable Energy Roadmap admitted that not only was 12 percent unfeasible, but a figure well below 10 percent was more realistic.

By January 2007, the original E.U.-15 member states (the E.U. had expanded to 27 states by then) had actually achieved a figure of only 6.4 percent from renewable sources. So when the E.U. summit in March 2007 upped the renewable energy sources target to 20 percent by 2020, its acknowledgment that the target would prove “challenging” was viewed by most energy insiders as something of a gross understatement.

The Roadmap stated that Europe’s renewables share was growing too slowly. To speed things up, a plan was devised for the main sectors: electricity, biofuels for transport, and heating and cooling.

The Roadmap sees electricity as the key sector for producing genuine progress. It argues that if all of the 27 E.U. member states made their national quotas on renewables for 2010 in this sector, the proportion of electricity consumption from renewables would be 21 percent. But only nine E.U. member states – Denmark, Germany, Finland, Hungary, Ireland, Luxembourg, Spain, Sweden, and the Netherlands – are in fact on track. The reality is that unless the present trends change, the E.U. will achieve a target approaching at best 19 percent.

According to the Roadmap, electricity production from renewables “could increase from the current 15 percent to approximately 34 percent of overall consumption in 2020.” It envisages wind power contributing 12 percent, with one-third coming from offshore installations. The report states that it believes this “is feasible,” citing as its chief role models Denmark (18 percent of electricity production from wind power), Spain (8 percent), and Germany (6 percent).

The Roadmap asserts that biomass can “grow significantly using wood, energy crops, and bio-waste in power stations.” It does not address the significant contribution nuclear power could make, as some member states, including Austria, are committed to a non-nuclear program and refuse to see nuclear power as a potential source.

Finally, the report notes the part other “novel” technologies could play, including solar, thermal, wind, and tidal power, while recognizing that their real potential may only be realized once their costs are reduced.

Wind energy is central to the success of the E.U. Roadmap’s target for electricity production. But merely citing Denmark’s “world lead” in renewable wind power is highly misleading. Indeed, Denmark’s success is due largely to the country’s ability to send electricity to its neighbors. (For more, see Robert Bryce’s interview with Hugh Sharman in this issue.) Worse still, there is mounting evidence of the inefficiency and unreliability of wind turbines in the U.K.

A 2006 report from the British Renewable Energy Foundation showed that, despite the millions of pounds expended on wind across England, Scotland, and Wales, turbines operated at an average capacity of well below 30 percent. The report went so far as to designate some lowland England sites as “real turkeys.” In 2007, a study of turbine production figures published in the National Grid’s “Winter Consultation Report 2007/8” showed that, even in the world’s windiest nation, wind turbines were highly erratic and unreliable. Between October 2006 and February 2007, National Grid figures, including offshore as well as onshore developments, revealed that there were 17 days when output from the 1,632 windmills studied was less than 10 percent, 5 days when it was less than 5 percent, and 1 day when it was 2 percent. During the entire time studied, at best the wind turbines performed at 35 percent efficiency.

Biofuel renewable targets for transport have proven particularly elusive. Under the 2003 Roadmap Directive, that year’s 0.5 percent gas and diesel share was to rise across the E.U. to 2 percent by 2005 and to 5.75 percent by 2010. Targets set by individual states for 2005, however, were far less ambitious, equating to a pan-E.U. share of 1.4 percent. Only Germany, France, and Sweden reached more than 1 percent, with Germany accounting for two-thirds of total E.U. consumption.

The Roadmap states biofuels could contribute 43 million tons of oil equivalent, about 14 percent of the fuel market. Ethanol and biodiesel are suggested as the two major sources for biofuel growth. Brazil, which gets about 20 percent of its fuel needs from biofuels, is of course cited as the example to emulate. But the reality is somewhat less convincing. At present, Sweden gets about 4 percent of its petrol from biofuels. Germany, a leader in biodiesel production, gets about 6 percent.

The Roadmap claims that further increases are possible by growing more cereal and sugarcane crops. Smaller contributions would come from other feedstocks to make ethanol. Rapeseed oil would remain the chief biodiesel feedstock, complemented by smaller quantities of soy and palm oil.

Major problems associated with biofuel production – or, more accurately, agrifuels – are already the subject of debate. Deforestation (especially of the rainforests) and rising food prices (a direct consequence of using food crops as fuel) have caused an uproar among Europe’s environmental groups. The Roadmap admits that the E.U.’s biofuel feedstock imports will need to increase, creating further pressures on global agricultural production.

The heating and cooling sector accounts for half of the E.U.’s energy consumption, and without doubt offers the greatest flexibility for cost-effective renewable energy use through biomass, solar, and thermal energy sources. But no specific targets have been set for this sector, other than including it as a contributing element to the 12 percent target set in 1997. Renewables today account for less than 10 percent of the E.U.’s energy consumed for heating and cooling.

The Roadmap suggests that renewable energy for heating and cooling has the capacity to more than double by 2020. As keys to progress, it cites biomass, “more efficient household systems,” and in particular, “biomass-fired heat and power stations.” Geothermal sources (such as in Sweden, with half of Europe’s geothermal installations) and solar power (such as in Germany and Austria) can also play a significant role.

The prospects for these renewables are undoubtedly more realistic, but that’s due to the advent of better, more efficient household systems (like furnaces and insulation) than from the renewable sources themselves.

So what’s the bottom line? Now that’s where it gets interesting. In March, the head of the European Investment Bank confirmed that the total cost of achieving the E.U.’s renewable energy goals would likely be a staggering 1.1. trillion euros over the next 14 years. Given that the entire annual E.U. budget amounts to just 100 billion euros, that is clearly a huge hurdle. Asked about who was going to pay the pending trillion-euro invoice, E.U. president and Germany’s chancellor Angela Merkel, betraying the thoroughly ideological philosophy underpinning the Roadmap, responded, “With the best will in the world, I can’t tell you that.” Neither, it seems, can anyone else.