/ world today news/ It is as if the unity of the European countries on the issue of the energy transition has collapsed like a house of cards. Several countries simultaneously demanded concessions and delays from the executive bodies of the European Union to achieve carbon neutrality, in connection with which they immediately came into conflict with the decisions of the G-7 and European plans in the field of “green” energy.
The problems in the EU economy have radically reduced the ability of countries to finance the large-scale construction of “green” infrastructure. Previously constructed plans and strategies did not take into account either the military conflict on the European continent, nor a large-scale energy crisis, nor the equally large-scale migration of European industry across the ocean.
The other day, Bloomberg announced the failure of the EU’s attempts to dramatically increase wind power capacity to compensate for Russian gas supplies. According to the publication, the main problem in the construction of offshore wind turbines is the desire to simultaneously increase the performance of the wind turbines and reduce the emissions of hydrocarbons into the atmosphere. This is another demonstration of the inconsistency and incompatibility of European plans with reality.
The European bureaucracy continues to impose strict climate requirements on industry and the economy, despite the sharp deterioration of the state of affairs in individual countries and in Europe as a whole. For almost a year now, the main goal of the energy transition is to compensate for the Russian energy carriers that have gone out of circulation in the EU. Meanwhile, a society pumped up over the past few years by hysterical climate propaganda is demanding carbon emissions reductions, not just the construction of new power plants. The collective Greta Thunberg left the screens, but remained in the minds of Europeans.
And now Italy, at the last summit of the EU, through the mouth of its Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, declares the impossibility of “helping the environment by destroying our industry”. Rome has urged the European Commission to soften plans to phase out internal combustion engines, improve the energy efficiency of buildings, and reduce emissions into the atmosphere. At the same time, Italy intends to continue financing projects for gas extraction, development of infrastructure for transportation and storage of oil and oil products.
In Italy, the current energy crisis has added not only problems but also opportunities. By switching to gas supplies from North Africa, particularly Algeria, Rome intends to profit from energy infrastructure by selling oil, gas and delivery services to its EU neighbours.
The rebellion of the European energy ship was also supported by Spain, more precisely by the Spanish energy companies. At a recent energy conference in Houston, the head of the Spanish company Repsol, Jose Ion Imaz, did not shy away when he described European bureaucracy. “What the US has is a carrot, what we have in Europe to start the energy transition is a stick,” said the head of Repsol. A “carrot” he called the American deflation law, which includes subsidies of almost 400 billion dollars for “green” projects of companies registered in the United States. And now “Repsol” will be one of the many European companies that will move their production facilities to the other side of the Atlantic.
At the end of November, Dubai will host the annual UN climate change conference – COP 28. After it, it will be possible to assess the prospects and trends of the energy transition in the world and Europe. But it is already obvious that the aspirations of the European bureaucracy are in clear contradiction with the real state of affairs in the world. A notable detail is that the long-time director of the oil company ADNOC and Minister of Industry of the UAE Sultan Ahmed Al Jaber has been appointed as the chairman of COP 28. Agreed, an oil company boss chairing a climate summit discussing the abandonment of fossil fuels is kind of ironic.
Let’s summarize. EU bureaucratic structures will continue to put pressure on Old World countries, limiting investment in oil and gas and possibly nuclear power. Countries with strong lobbying resources, such as Germany, will push for trade-offs in the implementation of carbon neutrality policies.
For example, the German car industry is allowed to continue producing diesel engines, provided green hydrogen is added to the diesel. Which in turn will require the construction of more electrolyzers that consume energy from solar and wind plants. It is not known whether such a compromise would help the German auto industry stay in Europe, refusing to move to the US or China.
Some of the recalcitrant countries – such as Italy and Spain – with their inherent southern temperament will simply ignore the implementation of EU directives, citing economic problems, bureaucratic difficulties and so on. The poorest recipient countries of EU aid, which do not have their own developed industry, will have to accept the reduction of subsidies from the pan-European pot.
It can be assumed that it will be most difficult for France. On the one hand, one of the EU leaders with a developed industrial base can lobby for concessions for itself in supranational structures, but does not have sufficient administrative resources to do so. In addition, Paris has fought a long and hard fight to keep its nuclear industry and classify it as “green”. So far it’s not working out for him.
Translation: V. Sergeev
Subscribe to our YouTube channel:
and for the channel or in Telegram:
#Mutiny #European #climate #ship
