European countries are already maneuvering to seek alternatives to Russian gas

Since Russia attacked Ukraine, European countries have been looking for a way out of the geostrategic alley in which the vast majority of them are trapped: Russia is their main supplier of gas, an essential source of energy to keep homes warm and industry up and running without resorting to the most polluting fossil fuels, such as coal. The Western response to the war unleashed by Russia has been to try to sever all possible economic relations. The goal now is to find a substitute for this gas without plunging Europe into an unprecedented energy crisis. And the largest countries are already taking steps.

In the Eurozone, the objective is to replace two thirds of the gas consumed by Russia, which is equivalent to approximately 10% of its entire energy mix. But the biggest problem is with Germany and Italy, where Russian gas accounts for about 15% of the energy they consume in a year.

Germany is the country with the most difficulties, since the commitment to Russian gas is long-term: the country decided to close all its nuclear power plants after the Fukushima crisis (Japan) in 2011, betting on more coal and more gas to replace that production. And with the output coal for its high emissions of polluting gases, the gas had to become increasingly relevant. Not only that, but Germany does not have Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) regasification plants, so it opted for the Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline to bring it directly from Russia. All these plans have been blown up, with the same forcefulness with which Vladimir Putin bombs cities in Ukraine.

However, the country’s options are limited by one factor: the current government – and any other possible alternative coalition – is made up of The Greens, a party created on the basis of a frontal opposition to nuclear energy. His co-leader and Economy Minister Robert Habeck has opted to sign an LNG deal with Qatar. Although he has not indicated amounts or details of the agreement, he has indicated that it will be for the long term and that it could allow them to abandon Russian gas as of next year.

For its part, Italy is seeking help directly from Spain, a country that has also faced nuclear power (in this case since the Chernobyl disaster in 1987) and has half as many renewable sources as the European average (11% compared to 22). % of the EU). Italy runs on gas, and last week Italian technical manager Snam announced that he is working to create a gas pipeline from Barcelona to Genoa to expand supply.

In the same vein, Spain is also debating the approval, long stalled, of Midcat, a gas pipeline to France that will allow the use of the seven LNG regasification plants on the Peninsula (six in Spain and one in Portugal) to supply central Europe. The Iberian plants account for 25% of European capacity, and could create an alternative route to Russia through methane tankers and gas pipelines to the rest of the continent.

United Kingdom squeezes its deposits

The European country that has the easiest time replacing its Russian imports is the one that can access its own gas fields: the United Kingdom. The British country imports 1% of its energy needs from beyond the Urals, so an increase in local production would be enough to compensate. Thus, the Prime Minister, Boris Johnson, plans to give the green light to the first tender for extractions from the North Sea deposit since 2020.

The country’s big problem is that oil and gas reserves are falling at a rapid pace -about 7% per year-, and the climate goals -which foresee reaching net zero emissions in 2050- have led to a rapid slowdown in investments in these deposits. In addition, an increase in investments in wells will take years to be reflected in production. The Government insists that the use of more efficient techniques is making it possible to obtain better results and extract more fuel than expected from old wells.

The hidden advantage for Johnson, who has already approved a veto on Russian oil, is that an accelerated emptying of Scottish deposits would also be a blow to the plans of Scottish independence. His original plans supposed to finance the hypothetical new state with the profits from the extraction of hydrocarbons, to compensate for the disappearance of funds from England. Expending the fields prematurely to replace Russia would mean killing two birds with one stone for London.