Although the European Commission was due to present its ‘roadmap’ for phasing out Russian fossil fuels at the end of February, it has still not been brought to the table, as several MEPs regretted on Wednesday 12 March during a plenary debate in Strasbourg on the gradual phasing out of Russian gas and other Russian energy products in the EU.
Speaking in the Chamber, the European Commissioner for Energy, Dan Jørgensen, assured the House that work on the ‘roadmap’ was “ongoing” and that the European Commission wanted to honour this commitment, without giving a date for publication.
While this plan should meet the objective of eliminating all Russian imports by 2027, most MEPs regretted that the EU was “lagging behind”, stressing that Europe could not embark on the path of rearmament while continuing to depend on imports from “the Russian aggressor”.
Sandra Kalniete (EPP, Latvian) called for diversification of supply sources, not ruling out more imports from the United States, which she said could serve as a “bridge to solidify our shattered transatlantic relations”.
On the contrary, Mohammed Chahim (S&D, Dutch) warned against new dependencies on foreign countries and called instead for working towards Europe's energy independence, banking on the potential of renewable energies.
“Relying on fossil fuels and imports from abroad only prolongs the price shock, blackmail and uncertainty. We've seen it: a tweet from Donald Trump, an incident in the Middle East, a natural disaster, and prices soar,” he said.
Adam Bielan (CRE, Polish), for his part, called for an urgent attack on the loopholes that allow European sanctions to be circumvented, highlighting that the European Parliament had repeatedly called for more drastic measures with a comprehensive package of sanctions targeting Russian liquefied natural gas (LNG), a ban on transhipment via European ports and a regulatory framework preventing companies from circumventing restrictions through intermediaries.
He also called for supplies to be sourced from “reliable” partners, such as the United States and Norway, and for investment in nuclear power and hydrogen.
Virginijus Sinkevičius (Greens/EFA, Lithuanian) felt that the way to ensure the EU’s independence from Russian fossil fuels was to give priority to renewable energy and energy efficiency.
Like other MEPs, he also found it implausible that EU spending on Russian fossil fuels had exceeded financial aid to Ukraine in 2024. (Original version in French by Pauline Denys)