Austria 33
can be methanised with green hydrogen, stored and traded in gas tanks/pipeline
systems. In this circular economy, material and energy cycles are well adjusted to
each other and mostly closed.
New processes can convert CO 2 into CH 4 which can be re- used as basic
material. Also, materials such as concrete can play a role in storing energy.
Stakeholders emphasised the crucial importance of pursuing (in parallel) the
exhaustion of energy efficiency potentials, the change of the energy mix, and
the implementation of storage technologies.
Austria is embedded in the European Union which has developed towards
more integration and the capacity to act commonly, particularly facilitating
cross- border action within the EU (e.g. harmonisation measures intended for an
‘Energy Union’), as well as negotiating more effectively with larger regional
blocks such as China or the USA. There is already significant EU action to
stimulate a low- carbon transition until 2020 and to provide a reliable regulatory
framework. At the EU level, a strategy will be developed that enables electricity
production and transfer across countries. Given the large quantities of electricity that Austria would need in the midterm if steel production is based on
hydrogen, stakeholders stress that domestic potentials are insufficient. Also,
import possibilities might decline since neighbouring countries might also
choose electrification pathways. South- eastern Europe with its large potential
regarding renewables could – under consideration of nature protection requirements – provide potential for imports to Austria. Besides the possibility of
importing electricity, Mayer, Bachner, and Steininger (2019) and Bachner et al.
(2018a; 2018b) show that deep decarbonisation of Austrian steel making is
within domestic renewable potentials.
As an essential aspect of a transition towards decarbonisation of economic
activities, or of carbon management, in Austria by 2050, a deliberate institutional framework is needed, plus an end to any public support for fossil fuels.
In 2050, Austria is net climate neutral and resilient overall to ecological,
social, and economic challenges. Co- operation between the private and the
public sector is strongly developed. ‘Know how’ exchange and co- operation in
the triangle of public services, the economy, and sciences are made via a dedicated climate secretariat and supported by a centre for climate studies. In the
industrial sector there will be refineries, in particular for supplying non- energetic
by- products. CCS is allowed in the meantime as part of a carbon management
(as described above). Policy measures are therefore designed in an integrative
way and a fragmentation of different interests is reduced.
Risks and uncertainties related to the pathways
In the stakeholder co- production process, clusters of risks have been created
in order to get a more holistic picture of risks both before and during implementation of the Austrian transition pathways (Figure 3.1). These clusters
and accompanying sub- clusters comprise implementation risks (barriers) as
well as consequential risks (impacts). While some clusters intrinsically focus
can be methanised with green hydrogen, stored and traded in gas tanks/pipeline
systems. In this circular economy, material and energy cycles are well adjusted to
each other and mostly closed.
New processes can convert CO 2 into CH 4 which can be re- used as basic
material. Also, materials such as concrete can play a role in storing energy.
Stakeholders emphasised the crucial importance of pursuing (in parallel) the
exhaustion of energy efficiency potentials, the change of the energy mix, and
the implementation of storage technologies.
Austria is embedded in the European Union which has developed towards
more integration and the capacity to act commonly, particularly facilitating
cross- border action within the EU (e.g. harmonisation measures intended for an
‘Energy Union’), as well as negotiating more effectively with larger regional
blocks such as China or the USA. There is already significant EU action to
stimulate a low- carbon transition until 2020 and to provide a reliable regulatory
framework. At the EU level, a strategy will be developed that enables electricity
production and transfer across countries. Given the large quantities of electricity that Austria would need in the midterm if steel production is based on
hydrogen, stakeholders stress that domestic potentials are insufficient. Also,
import possibilities might decline since neighbouring countries might also
choose electrification pathways. South- eastern Europe with its large potential
regarding renewables could – under consideration of nature protection requirements – provide potential for imports to Austria. Besides the possibility of
importing electricity, Mayer, Bachner, and Steininger (2019) and Bachner et al.
(2018a; 2018b) show that deep decarbonisation of Austrian steel making is
within domestic renewable potentials.
As an essential aspect of a transition towards decarbonisation of economic
activities, or of carbon management, in Austria by 2050, a deliberate institutional framework is needed, plus an end to any public support for fossil fuels.
In 2050, Austria is net climate neutral and resilient overall to ecological,
social, and economic challenges. Co- operation between the private and the
public sector is strongly developed. ‘Know how’ exchange and co- operation in
the triangle of public services, the economy, and sciences are made via a dedicated climate secretariat and supported by a centre for climate studies. In the
industrial sector there will be refineries, in particular for supplying non- energetic
by- products. CCS is allowed in the meantime as part of a carbon management
(as described above). Policy measures are therefore designed in an integrative
way and a fragmentation of different interests is reduced.
Risks and uncertainties related to the pathways
In the stakeholder co- production process, clusters of risks have been created
in order to get a more holistic picture of risks both before and during implementation of the Austrian transition pathways (Figure 3.1). These clusters
and accompanying sub- clusters comprise implementation risks (barriers) as
well as consequential risks (impacts). While some clusters intrinsically focus