“So far, the talks about the formation of a new federal government have been very constructive and based on trust. Annalena Baerbock should also maintain this professionalism, ”said Bernd Westphal, economic policy spokesman for the SPD parliamentary group, the Handelsblatt. Westphal is a member of the SPD’s economics working group for the coalition negotiations. The coalition negotiations begin this Thursday.
But Westphal is not just about questions of style. In terms of content, too, he considers their objection to be unfounded. Baerbock had told the newspapers of the Funke media group that the Federal Network Agency should not initially grant the pipeline an operating license. According to European energy law, the operator of the pipeline must “be different from the one who conducts the gas,” said the Green leader.
“As long as it is one and the same group, the operating license may not be issued,” she added. According to a media report, Russia had previously asked Germany to certify the pipeline before the January 8 deadline.
Top jobs of the day
Find the best jobs now and
be notified by email.
Westphal said that the pipeline project, like other infrastructure projects, will also be checked by the Federal Network Agency, after which the EU Commission will be notified. After the phase-out from nuclear energy and coal, “gas will be the last fossil fuel that we urgently need for security of supply in the area of electricity and heat,” he added.
Federal Network Agency has to decide
The more natural gas arrives in the European market, the lower and more stable the prices are for consumers. At the beginning of September, Nord Stream 2 AG applied to the Federal Network Agency for certification as an independent transport network operator in accordance with the Energy Industry Act. The regulatory authority now has until January 8 to prepare a draft decision, which will then be submitted to the EU Commission.
The EU Commission has already announced reservations, it is almost as critical of the pipeline as Baerbock. “Nord Stream 2 is not a project in the common European interest”, clarified a spokesman. The aim of the Commission is to ensure that the gas pipeline is operated in a “transparent, non-discriminatory manner” and in accordance with “international and European energy law”.
When interpreting the legal situation, the Commission comes to a similar conclusion as Baerbock: The EU gas directive, which was tightened in 2019, requires that pipelines leading from third countries to Europe must be “unbundled”. Operator and supplier should therefore not be one and the same company.
The Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline has long since become a political issue. Sharply rising energy prices only intensify the debate.
(Photo: via REUTERS)
However, it is not clear whether this requirement will only be met if Gazprom, which intends to export its gas through the new pipes, parted ways with the operating company Nord Stream 2 AG. It could also be sufficient to make a more pronounced demarcation within the group of companies. How exactly the EU Commission positions itself here is not yet clear. First of all, she wants to wait for the Federal Network Agency’s decision.
The Brussels experts then have up to four months to assess. To be on the safe side, the commission spokesman has already warned the German licensing authorities: “The Federal Network Agency must take the Commission’s position fully into account.”
But the Commission is also under pressure. Member States are becoming increasingly nervous about the high energy prices. Should the impression arise that Brussels is delaying a project that could remedy the situation, a strict interpretation of the gas directive would be politically difficult to maintain.
It was only on Tuesday that the Russian ambassador to the EU, Vladimir Tschischow, recommended that Germany quickly complete the approval process for Nord Stream 2. That was “of course better for the end user,” said the Russian diplomat. However, observers consider it unlikely that the Federal Network Agency will not exhaust the deadline and, as feared by Baerbock, will present a draft decision well before January 8th.
Green base puts pressure
Nord Stream 2 AG also takes the position that it is not subject to the regulation of the reformed EU gas market directive, which requires certification as an independent transport network operator in accordance with the Energy Industry Act. Proceedings are currently underway before the Düsseldorf Higher Regional Court and the EU Court of Justice.
Upon request, the company itself stated that as an operator of a commercial investment, it is fundamentally not open to political debates. “Nord Stream 2 takes all necessary precautions to ensure compliance with applicable rules and regulations,” said a spokesman.
The debate about Nord Stream 2, which Baerbock has recently started, underscores the fact that the Greens are under pressure. It must make it unmistakably clear to its own base and its regular electorate that it is in control of the coalition negotiations on its core issues of energy and climate policy.
On Wednesday, the Green Youth expressed criticism of the previous proposals made by the traffic light negotiating partners on climate protection. So far, climate protection has been neglected, wrote the Green Youth Organization on Twitter. The organization joins the strict demands of the climate activists from Fridays for Future.
The Green Youth calls on the SPD, Greens and FDP in their tweet to limit the emissions of climate-damaging carbon dioxide (CO2) in such a way that global warming of more than 1.5 degrees is prevented. In addition, the junior organization is calling for the use of natural gas to be phased out by 2035 at the latest and a “consistent and socially acceptable” phase-out of coal by 2030 at the latest.
The organization Fridays for Future had previously warned the SPD, the Greens and the FDP to fix a much more ambitious climate protection in their upcoming negotiations for the formation of a future federal government.
More: Overall view instead of annual sector targets – traffic light wants more pragmatism in climate protection