Stakeholders have been reacting to the European Commission’s new energy and climate proposals presented on Wednesday 15 December, with the place of fossil gas in the EU’s future energy system at the heart of the debate.
The four initiatives unveiled - the legislative package on low-carbon and renewable gases (see EUROPE 12854/11), the proposal for a regulation on methane emissions from the energy sector (see EUROPE 12854/12), the revision of the Energy Performance of Buildings Directive (see EUROPE 12854/13) and the Communication to promote carbon storage (see EUROPE 12854/15) - are part of the second part of the Commission’s legislative package to put the EU on a path to a net reduction of its greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions of at least 55% by 2030 compared to 1990 levels (‘Fit for 55 package’).
But for environmental NGOs, the Commission’s proposals will not take the EU down this road.
The European Environmental Bureau (EEB) and CAN Europe, two European NGO networks, have called the package a “Christmas present” to the fossil fuel industry.
“At the core of the gas and methane legislation we would have expected to find clear signs towards the phase out of fossil gas by 2035 and towards a transition to a 100% renewable energy system”, lamented Esther Bollendorff, European Gas Policy Coordinator for CAN Europe.
Gas package
Regarding the new gas package, the NGO criticises the “untargeted use” of low-carbon hydrogen (from fossil fuels or nuclear), no provision for independent oversight of the planning of future hydrogen infrastructure, a rapid decline in fossil gas and the dismantling of existing fossil gas infrastructure.
In the same vein, the think-tank E3G pointed to the risk of conflicts of interest in EU infrastructure planning “by giving a major role to gas infrastructure operators”.
Hydrogen Europe, an organisation representing the European hydrogen industry, on the other hand, sees the new package as the start of the “golden age of clean hydrogen”. It provides “clear policy incentives for ensuring hydrogen is front and centre to the EU’s decarbonisation efforts while channelling investments into dedicated infrastructure”.
“The European Commission gets the message that gases are good for the energy transition, for industry and for households across Europe”, reacted James Watson, Secretary General of Eurogas.
Energy performance of buildings
The proposed revision of the Energy Performance of Buildings Regulation has also come under fire from NGOs.
Like the EEB, ECOS particularly regretted that the requirement for new buildings to be zero-emission from 2030 is limited to on-site energy consumption, ignoring the other stages of a building’s life-cycle that cause emissions.
For energy poverty NGO Right to Energy, the Commission’s proposal “risks delivering shallow renovations at best” as it leaves too much flexibility to Member States. It considered the obligation to retrofit the worst performing residential buildings (G-rated) to the F energy standard by 2030 and E by 2033 to be too weak.
For its part, the European Alliance of Companies for Energy Efficiency in Buildings (EuroACE) called this target “the starting point for a systemic change”. Welcoming the Commission’s intention to strengthen energy certificates for buildings and national renovation plans, the organisation nevertheless warned that “a lot has to be done”.
Methane Regulation
With regard to the regulation on methane emissions from fossil fuels, EEB complained that the scope was too narrow. Leaving aside emissions from livestock and the waste sector, the Commission is only proposing to tackle about 19% of methane emissions in the EU, the NGO said.
Together with CAN Europe, they criticised the lack of immediate action to tackle emissions from imported fossil fuels, while the EU is dependent on imports for 70% of its coal consumption, 97% of its oil consumption and 90% of its fossil gas consumption.
They also fear that the Communication for Sustainable Carbon Cycles will open the door to carbon offsets that would allow large polluters to “claim climate neutrality” without reducing their emissions. (Original version in French by Damien Genicot)