The European Parliament’s Committee on Industry, Research and Energy (ITRE) will vote, on Thursday 13 October, on the rules for using funds from the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF) to finance investments under the ‘REPowerEU’ plan.
The stakes are high, in particular since one of the issues is whether nuclear power generation can be supported by the RRF - the budgetary instrument of the Next Generation EU Recovery Plan - in the context of REPowerEU (the EU’s plan to move away from dependence on Russian fossil fuels).
MEPs will also have to take a position on whether the ‘do no significant harm’ principle should not apply to investments related to the REPowerEU chapters in the National Recovery and Resilience Plans (RRP).
Three compromise amendments are on the table.
While the first is supported by all six political groups in the Parliament, the other two divide MEPs.
A compromise supported by the S&D and Renew Europe groups proposes that the REPowerEU chapter of the recovery and resilience plans should allow for investments and reforms aimed at, among other things, helping to improve energy infrastructure and facilities in order to meet immediate oil and gas security of supply needs, as well as increasing renewable or “non-fossil fuel” hydrogen production capacity (i.e. the production of hydrogen from electricity generated by nuclear power plants).
This approach is in line with the Commission’s original proposal.
Furthermore, the S&D and Renew Europe groups suggest extending the derogation from the ‘do no significant harm’ principle. According to their proposal, this principle would not apply to reforms and investments that are supposed to contribute to the objectives of REPowerEU.
“This derogation opens the door to the financing of virtually any fossil fuel project, whether upstream, midstream or downstream – plausibly with no exception” the NGO CAN Europe said.
The compromise also adds the increase in the production and use of sustainable biomethane to the objectives covered by the REPowerEU chapter of the recovery plans. It introduces as well an indicative list of energy infrastructure projects, mainly gas projects, which are considered to be priorities.
The other compromise amendment, supported by the EPP, ECR and ID groups, is substantially similar. However, it replaces the wording “non-fossil” with “low carbon”. According to these groups, the REPowerEU chapter of the recovery plans should help “boost low-carbon energy sources production within the Union”.
Although the text submitted to the vote is a draft opinion, the ITRE Committee has shared competence on these points of the text.
See the compromise amendments: https://aeur.eu/f/3kx ; https://aeur.eu/f/3ky ; https://aeur.eu/f/3kz (Original version in French by Damien Genicot)