Brussels, 03/04/2009 (Agence Europe) - Organised on 2 April by the European Parliament energy committee headed by Anne Laperrouze (ALDE, France), the public hearing on energy supply security (gas in particular) in the light of the Russian-Ukrainian dispute only confirmed how imperative it is to diversify sources, supply routes and suppliers, develop good interconnections, ensure good preparation for reversing gas flow in networks if necessary, and use more liquefied natural gas (LNG). Ms Laperrouze, however, took the liberty of speaking of the road still to be covered before there is guaranteed energy solidarity between the EU27, in the light of the role played by Italy, for example, which is suspected of having blocked gas exports to countries affected by the gas crisis in Central and Eastern Europe. “The crisis has demonstrated the deep lack of transparency in gas flows and strategic stocks”, Energy Commissioner Andris Piebalgs stressed, placing emphasis on the need to have an early warning system for interruption in supply, and new gas interconnections. Although he gave assurance that his services are preparing a response for clarifying a number of the facts relating to the gas crisis as requested by the members of the energy committee (EUROPE 9846), Mr Piebalgs was nonetheless strongly criticised by Claude Turmes of Luxembourg for the slowness of the response - which, as the Green member said, shows the Commission's lack of transparency. The commissioner also stressed the importance of a “more consistent approach” towards the supplier and transit countries. In this context, he spoke of the commitment taken by the EU on 23 April to invest in modernisation of the Ukrainian gas transit system, a project from which Russia felt excluded, expressing great displeasure (EUROPE 9871). In this respect, Suzanne Nies, a research worker with IFRI, highlighted how important it is for the EU to consider Russia as a “completely normal country with which there must be negotiation”. Russia, after all, has proven that it has been a reliable supplier since the 1970s, even after the collapse of the USSR. Of course, Ms Nies stressed, Moscow guarantees the energy security of its partners “in a different way depending on the country”. Thus commercial gas conflicts with countries hitherto in the former USSR - Belarus and Ukraine - seem to date back to the Cold War. The EU, however, also shares responsibility, as the Neighbourhood Policy has not allowed “stable and transparent governance to be imposed on these countries”. Ms Nies took the view that, if there were to be another gas crisis in 2010, the EU, which certainly has long term solutions, “would not be able to do very much”. She raised the question of “European energy governance”. In her view, it is necessary to “link the patchwork of European governance to make it as effective as possible”. She believes that, in order to have greater supply security, it is necessary to link the Eastern Partnership and the Energy Community to the patchwork of European governance, forming Community gas stocks, strengthening interconnection, using LNG in the short term to avoid all “blackmail” and investing more in energy R&D. Austrian regulator Walter Boltz recommends for his part the establishment of a monitoring system to speed up decision-making as a matter of urgency and to gather all information at regional and national levels, thus avoiding delays in reversing gas flows in pipelines. Better coordination in the transmission systems would thus have allowed German and Austrian gas companies to avoid being unable to reverse flows towards Slovakia. (E.H./transl.jl)