European Parliament rapporteur for the revision of the EU Regulation (347/2013) on Trans-European Energy Networks (TEN-E), Zdzisław Krasnodębski (ECR, Poland), will present his draft report to the Parliament’s Committee on Industry, Research and Energy (ITRE) on 13 April, with the aim, among others, of keeping gas projects within the scope of the Regulation.
In its revision proposal presented on 15 December 2020 (see EUROPE 12623/3, 12618/9), the European Commission plans to exclude natural gas projects from the categories of energy infrastructure eligible for EU financial support under the TEN-E Regulation (the so-called ‘projects of common interest’, or PCIs).
The reason for this choice is simple: although natural gas will, according to the institution, play a transitional role in allowing some Member States to move away from coal before moving towards renewable energies, the institution considers that the completion of the gas projects currently underway and already financed will be sufficient to finalise the EU’s gas network (see EUROPE 12686/25)
Mr Krasnodębski does not share this opinion.
Considering that the Commission’s estimates of the level of connectivity and resilience of supply “may be too optimistic”, he believes that there are still not enough interconnection and competition conditions in many small gas markets, for example in South Eastern Europe.
In his view, connectivity is still a problem between some Member States and the rest of Europe to ensure significant price convergence with North Western Europe.
The Polish MEP is also concerned that the exclusion of natural gas from the regulation threatens the completion of some gas projects on the current (fourth) list of PCIs.
Therefore, his draft report proposes that natural gas infrastructure projects already on the fourth list or to be included in the fifth list should not only retain PCI status, but also be eligible for the first list of PCIs to be established under the revised regulation.
Smart grids and electrolysers
Regarding other categories of infrastructure, Mr Krasnodębski suggests, among other things, reviewing the definition of smart gas networks designed to integrate renewable and low-carbon gases, such as biogas, biomethane and hydrogen, into existing gas distribution and transport networks.
According to him, this should not be limited to digital solutions, but should be extended to the necessary technical and engineering investments, such as valves, compressor stations and metering infrastructure.
The MEP also wants projects that allow the blending of renewable and low-carbon gases with methane into networks to be included in the category of smart gas network projects.
In addition, the draft report provides for the removal of the new category of electrolysers from the scope of the Regulation. For Mr Krasnodębski, the TEN-E Regulation is not the appropriate instrument to support the development of electrolysers, as they “cannot be considered as contributing to the interconnection or interoperability of national networks, nor is their trans-European character fully justified”.
Governance
On the governance side, the rapporteur agrees with the proposal to increase the monitoring role of the Agency for the Cooperation of Energy Regulators (ACER) and the Commission on the infrastructure development process.
However, he believes that the ‘European Networks of Transmission System Operators for Electricity and Gas’ (ENTSO-E and ENTSO-G) “should keep the central role in the process due to their unique expertise”, while stressing the importance of avoiding an administrative burden for project developers.
A divisive issue
Marie Toussaint (Greens/EFA, France), who was asked to draw up a draft opinion on this issue for the Parliament’s Committee on Environment (ENVI), took a position far removed from Mr Krasnodębski’s draft report, a sign of the divergence of views on the revision of the TEN-E regulation.
In particular, the French MEP proposes to exclude gas infrastructure projects (both natural gas and smart gas grid projects) on the grounds that “the potential increase in small-scale renewable gas projects requires only limited infrastructure adaptations”.
She also wants to exclude CO2 infrastructure projects, as potential CO2 capture projects will, in her view, not be linked to the energy sector (and thus to TEN-E), given “the possibility of replacing fossil-based energy production with renewables”.
Furthermore, Ms Toussaint says that the benefits of the projects should be valued beyond their capacity to increase the physical capacity for cross-border transfers.
She proposes to include a new category - heating and cooling network projects - and to review some of the criteria.
For electrolyser projects, the MEP recommends lowering the capacity threshold (20 MW as opposed to 100 MW in the Commission’s proposal) and reserving PCI status for electrolysers that support the deployment of renewable hydrogen.
For hydrogen projects, the draft opinion calls for the sustainability criteria to be strengthened. According to Ms Toussaint’s proposal, this criteria should “contribute significantly to sustainability by bringing hydrogen produced in hydrolysis facilities directly connected to power plants using renewable energy sources to consumption centres”.
Lastly, Ms Toussaint proposes to make ACER’s opinion binding and to create an independent body, called the Energy Infrastructure Council, to which a number of tasks currently carried out by the European Network of Transmission System Operators (ENTSO) would be transferred, including the preparation of the Ten Year Network Development Plan (TYNDP).
This would be composed of market operators from all relevant sectors, independent experts and civil society organisations.
Ms Toussaint’s draft opinion is expected to be presented to the ENVI Committee on 22 April.
See the draft report by Mr Krasnodębski: https://bit.ly/3t76mjr
See Ms Toussaint’s draft opinion: https://bit.ly/2Rnn8wQ (Original version in French by Damien Genicot)