The European Court of Auditors (ECA) warns that the REPowerEU European energy package, for the European Union (EU) to be independent from Russia, has “weaknesses and risks”, since it takes time to implement and depends on the financial “will” of Russia. the member states.
We are highlighting all these potential weaknesses and risks because REPowerEU’s goals may not be met due to this approach,” says Ivana Maletic, the ECA member responsible for an opinion published Tuesday on the plan.
The official admits that, due to the way REPowerEU is designed, the EU may “not be able to quickly identify and implement its strategic projects with an immediate and maximum impact on energy security and independence”, since it is depends on the procedures of the Recovery and Resilience Mechanism.
“This has a long duration and takes time,” says Ivana Maletic.
We already see fear throughout Europe about what will happen in winter, so it would be good to have a quick selection of strategic projects with the greatest impact on European security and independence and start implementing them as soon as possible, but with this procedure. […] We will only have the first chapters to be approved in mid-2023 or even in the finals, ”adds the official, at a time when a rupture in the Russian energy supply to Europe is feared.
The opinion issued by the ECA also contains a warning about financing.
When you look at the total funding, what is assured is these €20 billion of subsidies that come from the EU Emissions Trading Scheme, but everything else in the proposal depends on the willingness of Member States to use other funds”, warns Ivana Maletic. .
At stake is REPowerEU, the plan presented by the European Commission in mid-May to improve the resilience of the European energy system and make the EU independent of Russian fossil fuels before 2030, after the Ukraine war and supply problems.
According to the Brussels accounts, this energy package involves a additional investment of 210,000 million euros by 2027 for the EU to become independent from Russian energy and meet environmental targets.
The institution proposes that these amounts be financed from various sources, in a financing of almost 275,000 million euros supported by 20,000 million euros of subsidies through the EU Emissions Trading Scheme, up to around 27,000 million euros of voluntary transfer subsidies from the Cohesion Funds. , up to €7.5 billion in grants from voluntary transfers from the Rural Development Funds and up to €220 billion from the remaining loans (not requested by countries) under Recovery and Resilience.
However, the ECA points out in its opinion that “all these sources, except the permits of the EU Emissions Trading System, are outside the control of the Commission, since depend on the transfer of funds from Member States other policy areas or by using the remaining portion of the Recovery and Resilience Facility loans.”
Consequently, the total financing actually available may be considerably less and it is not certain that it will be sufficient to cover the investment needs estimated at 210,000 million euros”, adds the European auditor.
In the proposal, the European Commission argues that REPowerEU will be “rewarding”, since together with the Goal 55 package -which provides for an ecological transition with a 55% reduction in polluting emissions by 2030-, it will allow the EU to save 80 €1 billion in gas import costs, €12 billion in oil import costs and €1.7 billion in coal import costs per year.
The war in Ukraine, caused by the Russian invasion last February, has caused geopolitical tensions that have been affecting the European energy market, such as the EU imports 90% of the gas it consumeswith Russia accounting for around 45% of these imports, at varying levels between Member States.
Russia is also responsible for around 25% of EU oil imports and 45% of coal imports.
Source: Observadora
