France remains firm in its opposition to the MidCat gas pipeline project, which would connect Catalonia with the French region of Midi. Although the statements on Tuesday by the Minister of the Economy, Bruno Le Maire, who is usually liked in front of the cameras, opened the door to a certain predisposition, the government led by Emmanuel Macron later reiterated his refusal. Spain, Germany and Portugal hope to twist the arm of this “friendly” country, which they have already accused of lacking a “European sense”. But the leaders in Paris remain immovable in their position, while their ears whistle.
Faced with criticism from Madrid and Berlin, the French Minister for the Energy Transition, Agnès Pannier-Runacher, assured on Friday that they are committed to “European solidarity” to face the current crisis. “We have concluded that this reciprocal solidarity must be reinforced starting this winter, with gas and electricity exchanges with Germany and Spain,” he said after holding a Defense Council at the Elysée dedicated to the energy emergency. But the person in charge of this crucial portfolio at this time did not refer to MidCat, which her cabinet opposes.
This was confirmed in the middle of this week to this newspaper by sources close to the French Ministry of Energy Transition: “The construction of this infrastructure permanent and long-term, when we want to speed up the exit from fossil fuels and, in particular, from natural gas, in line with the European strategy, Is not suitable”. “Increasing the interconnection capacity between Spain and Germany through France would require a consequent reinforcement of the French network, which would require several years and cost several billion euros. This is not a response to the current energy crisis,” they added. “I’m not sure a new pipeline is going to get us through next winter,” Le Maire insisted on Saturday.
“The French Government is convinced of its rejection”
In France, they also share these arguments both experts as environmental groups, something unusual in a country where Macron is often criticized for a lack of green ambition. “Obviously, we fear that MidCat will end up being a reality, but we have the impression that the French government is convinced of its rejection,” says Anna-Lena Rebaud, head of campaigns on climate and just transition for the NGO Amis de la Terre. , which opposes the construction of this infrastructure, as is the case with most French environmental associations, but also Spanish ones. According to the Spanish Government, the part on the Iberian Peninsula could be finished in eight or nine months. Instead, the French would need several years.
“The construction of this gas pipeline would be long and could only pay off in the long run, which contradicts the will of the European Union to do without fossil fuels from 2050”, adds the militant of Amis de la Terre. “MidCat’s millions should be allocated to measures of sobriety and energy efficiency and to develop renewables,” she insists. She also recalls the impact on the territory, for example, “on aquifer ecosystems”, that the construction of this gas pipeline would entail. this feeds strong local resistancewhich the French Government prefers not to have to deal with.
To justify the construction of the MidCat in the midst of the ecological transition agenda, both Spain and Germany recall that it will also serve to transport green hydrogen. An argument also rejected by France. “The construction of hydrogen transport infrastructure is a long-term European issue that it has nothing to do with our security of supply for the next two winters”, indicated sources from the Ministry of Energy Transition. “The problem with green hydrogen is that it requires a whole series of transformations and it is not at all clear that it can be transported with long-distance gas pipelines in the short term,” says economist María Eugenia Sanin Vázquez, a professor at the University of Evry (to the south of of Paris) and an expert in the energy sector.
Strategic discrepancies between France and Germany
“I understand the interest of spain to boost this infrastructure again”, due to its numerous gas terminals and its capacity to regasify liquefied natural gas (LNG) —rrepresents 34% of the regasification capacity of the European Union—, “but I also understand the refusal of France, which does not obtain any benefit from the construction of this infrastructure and, on the other hand, the position of Germany seems less coherent to me,” says Thierry Bros, professor at Sciences Po Paris. “Why should we act like the subjects of Germany? Why should we bring you the gas? We have the impression that Germany decides and the rest executes”, adds this expert in the energy sector.
The current controversy over MidCat reflects one of the crucial aspects of the current crisis: the lack of a joint energy strategy within the EU. This is evidenced by the disparities between France and Germany. Macron’s France bases its energy transition on a commitment to nuclear power, while Germany carried out a rapid nuclear blackout in exchange for a gas alliance with Vladimir Putin’s Russia, which exploded into the air with the invasion of Ukraine. This alliance had the vocation to turn the Teutonic country into the gas hub (distribution center) of Europe, something that generated suspicions in France. In fact, he has in the past motivated French opposition to the construction of Nord Stream 2 at the same time that Macron was trying to improve his relations with Putin.
After the energy earthquake caused by the war, France prioritizes the construction of marine gas terminals —In the autumn the construction of a floating terminal in Le Havre will begin. It is aware that it is the ideal option thanks to its extensive coastline. On the other hand, this solution excites the Germans considerably less. a whole series of discrepancies that do not seem easy to resolve in the short term, taking into account the strategic value of energy in the economic competitiveness of each country. But it is also true that in times of crisis like the current one, European countries tend to make their most unexpected decisions.