The Commission vice-president in charge of the Energy Union, Maroš Šefčovič, highlighted the European Commission’s broad support during a plenary session debate on Wednesday 1 February, for one of the Junker Commission’s flagship projects. MEPs, however, promised to strengthen the measures in a recent clean energy package that they believe lacks ambition and contains a number of shortcomings. Several of them also reaffirmed their hostility to the Russian Nord Stream-2 gas pipeline project.
Speaking on behalf of the EPP Group, Krišjānis Kariņš, from Latvia, offered support for the Commission strategy to fight against climate change, improve business competitiveness and reduce consumer and industry prices. He emphasised that “objectives can be attained with competition. We need to get rid of all the barriers holding it back”. He also said that they needed to “examine in a reasonable way” how to reduce subsidies for fossil fuels. His Swedish colleague, Gunnar Hökmark, denounced Nord Stream-2 as a “project that conflicts with the Energy Union project” and said that it would increase the dominant position of the Russian gas company, Gazprom, in the EU.
Dan Nica from Romania and Kathleen Van Brempt from Belgium asserted support from the S&D Group for the efforts made by Šefčovič, but did, however, promise to strengthen the provisions in the clean energy package by making the objectives “more far-reaching and binding” for energy efficiency and renewables. Highlighting the need for “robust” energy governance, Van Brempt said: “this worked in the past why could it not do so in the future as well?” Her Lithuanian colleague, Zigmantas Balčytis, underlined the incompatibility of the Nord Stream-2 with EU objectives and denounced a “geopolitical project” that seeks to divide the EU.
Zdzislaw Krasnodębski, from Poland, speaking on behalf of the ECR, said that “clean energy is, obviously, very important, but one of the most important objectives is energy security” and he called for supplies to be diversified. He regretted that “the situation is not improving because the EU dependency on energy imports increased from 52% in 2010 to almost 56% in 2015 and is expected to reach 60%”. Krasnodębski also criticised the contradictory messages from the Commission, which were “positive” with regard to the LNG strategy and prospects for the North Gate project that would help supply gas from Norway, but “worrying” with regard to Nord Stream-2 and the OPAL gas pipeline.
Speaking on behalf of the ALDE Group, Fredrick Federley from Sweden highlighted the importance of guaranteeing good prices for consumers and industry, and making progress in the introduction of renewable energies. In this connection, he welcomed the fact that the EU was on the right track for achieving their 20% target by 2020. In an effort to improve energy efficiency, Morten Helveg Petersen, from Denmark, emphasised the need to support initiatives for renovating buildings.
Speaking on behalf of the GUE/NGL, Neoklis Sylikiotis, from Cyprus, regretted the “lack of measures to respond to serious EU problems regarding security of supply in certain countries and regions, as well as tackling fuel poverty resulting from neoliberal austerity policies”. Sylikiotis called for a “global plan” to fight fuel poverty and appealed for priority access for renewables to the networks and support for countries working to extract gas in the Eastern Mediterranean.
On behalf of the Greens/EFA, Benedek Jávor, from Hungary said that the proposals in the clean energy package did not meet the promises of the Commission on renewables and hampered “the energy transition and failed to tackle key problems and market distortions”. He also criticised the lack of incentives to reduce fossil fuel consumption and the “maintaining of privileges” for nuclear power. The MEP highlighted the shortcomings in the revised draft directive on energy efficiency, as well as the absence of appropriate incentives to introduce renewables at a later stage and the lack of proposals for tackling fuel poverty or support for “prosumers” such as energy cooperatives.
Speaking on behalf of the EFDD, Dario Tamburrano, from Italy, highlighted the shortcomings in the proposals for prosumers and the lack of burden sharing for renewables at a national level. He also regretted that fossil fuel externals had not been taken into account and that according to the IMF, market distortions were occurring due to direct and indirect subsidies worth €300 billion. Tamburrano highlighted the potential of decentralised energy production represented by the 112 million prosumers in the EU (citizens, local communities and hospitals) and which, by 2030, could possibly provide 19% of fuel demand in the EU or even 45% by 2050. (Original version in French by Emmanuel Hagry)