Samuele Furfari: "The EU is Still on the Same Track"
Natural Gas Europe had the pleasure to receive the views of Professor Samuele Furfari from Brussels Free University about the promise of the European Energy Union and its correlation with Russia's energy monopoly.
NGE: As Europe launches its Energy Union project, do you think that Russia's concerns are justified and this is an attempt to challenge Russian energy dominance?
SF: No, it should not be regarded this way. The idea of the Energy Union stem from the ongoing development of the EU policy as Europe depends on import too much and wants to decarbonize its economy. Of course, there is an implication with gas supply but the strategy is wider than just the gas supply. We started to work on that question back in June 1955 – 60 years ago – at the Messina conference where the EU founders recognized that more energy is needed in Europe. So, we are still on the same track and we still need energy, therefore, it is necessary to diversify the sources of supply, diversify the types of energy, diversify the routes of supply and to pursue long-term research and development.
NGE: How will gas contribute to a broader EU energy mix?
SF: Well, compared to other energy forms, gas is an emerging energy source. For a lot of people it is considered as a bridge for totally decarbonized energy, so I have no doubt it will remain globally important as this bridge will be quite long. The EU has an interest to diversify sources and ensure the security of supply. As you know, gas is producing less CO2 and it is SO2 -free, so it is certainly very clean fuel and a very good solution if we care about ecology. There is no reason the role of gas will be reduced any soon.
NGE: Recently Gazprom has agreed to expand the Nord Stream pipeline with the help of Western companies. What is the EU’s position on this?
SF: Private companies can do what they want. Of course, banks will not be ready to finance projects that are not bankable. For time being we observe that the Nord Stream is not operating at full capacity. So why should we built a new pipeline – that is a question that needs to be answered. It is a part of the strategy of the EU – to have many routes of supply. Therefore, it is not a political problem, but a business question .
NGE: You seem to be unsure about the necessity of additional Nord Stream lines.
SF: The Nord Stream has been built by Russian and European gas industries without any intervention of the EU. So, if they want to make a new line, it is up to them to decide. From the EU perspective we need to diversify the sources of supply and to integrate the gas market in Europe as much as possible – pipeline and internal infrastructure. The Commission is not going to finance the infrastructure outside the EU. We want to develop a proper functioning market – an internal gas market and this is the financing priority.
NGE: As for Turk Stream, do you see this as a project that will challenge the Southern Gas Corridor?
SF: It is the same answer that I gave you for the Nord Stream: this is an external pipeline, the Commission’s vocation is the financing of projects inside the EU, it is up to the industry in Turkey and Russia to decide what pipelines they want to build. We are interested in gas in Europe. The EU gas enterprise will buy the cheapest one and the most affordable.
NGE: Talking about Ukraine, how is the EU going to ensure energy security in the reality of endless conflict at one of the main gas routes? How is the EU helping Ukraine with its gas supply and transmission in light of the current conflict?
SF: We need to ensure that Ukraine is fully supplied with gas because gas or any other type of energy should not be used as a political tool but as an instrument of cooperation and development. The EU Commission is trying to find solutions and will continue to do so.
The EU is upgrading the Strategic Partnership on energy with Ukraine, in particular the importance of Ukraine as a transit country, helping to provide its energy market reforms and increasing energy efficiency for reducing its dependence on imported energy.
NGE: Moving to the internal questions, the debate on hydraulic fracking in Europe continues? Is this a viable option given the vocal opposition?
SF: The environmental legislation in Europe was in place before the development of shale gas and it has to be respected. On base of Article 194.2 of the Lisbon Treaty fracking is an option for the countries that want it provided all legislation in place is respected. Both the British government and the gas industry are totally committed to respect the legislation so we are confident it could work for them.
Marina Zvonareva is a Natural Gas Europe analyst focused on Russia’s international energy relations. Follow her on Twitter: @ZvonarevaMar1na