This is an HTML version of an attachment to the Freedom of Information request 'Information about the gas market reform'.



Ref. Ares(2020)2890088 - 04/06/2020

Trans-European energy infrastructure – evaluation of EU strategy |...
https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/initiatives/ares-2019...
(through natural gas as low emission source of energy in different sectors and enabling the
switch from carbon intensive); support increasing uptake of RES; air pollution mitigation
resulting from burning high emission and low-quality fuels; benefits from hybrid energy
systems and sector coupling.
Increasing consideration should be put on contribution of gas PCI projects to EU climate
and energy commitments in the long run.
The Reg. and, in particular, the PCI process can be improved and adapted to a changing
context on the following aspects.
Nowadays there are support and an adequate regulatory framework in place to promote
renewable electricity projects. On the other hand, when referring to the TEN-E framework
and the PCI process, there is very limited room for projects and technologies enabling
renewable and decarbonised gases.
With regards to the gas PCI process there are no clear indications whether those projects
could be eligible for PCI label (Annex II). All technologies contributing to the decarbonisation
of the energy system, including those enabling renewable and decarbonised gases, should
benefit from the same kind of treatment, assuring a level playing field between energy
carriers (technology neutrality). This especially in view of the 5th PCI process.
In terms of sustainability, Reg. 347/2013 defines that projects “involving two or more MSs or
located on the territory of one MSs but with significant cross-border impact”, to be PCI need
contributing significantly “through reducing emissions, supporting intermittent renewables
generation and enhancing deployments of renewable gas”. Renewable and decarbonised
gases projects enhance GHG emissions reductions that, by definition, represent cross-
border benefits. The same also applies to gas projects as set out in Annex II.2 provided that
they contribute to the switch from carbon intensive fuels and RES support. Other cross-
border effects are determined by positive externalities generated by technology and
innovation diffusion across EU countries via energy transition projects implementation and
scaling-up. It would therefore be appropriate to amend TEN-E to ensure that for energy
transition projects the requirement to involve two or more MSs would not represent a
limitation.
Anticipating those needs and considering that projects that want to apply for the PCI label
must be included in the latest available TYNDP, ENTSOG TYNDP 2020 for the first time
opened to Energy Transition Projects submission, like P2G, biomethane plants, other
technologies producing hydrogen from natural gas, CCS/CCU, LNG/CNG filling stations.
ENTSOG believes that the PCI assessment should consider these activities too. The new
regulation should define differentiation of projects with or without European relevance.
For projects successful implementation not only permitting but also funding is a key
accelerator. For projects with deeper innovative dimension grants could have even a more
decisive impact. Funds should be more accessible to PCIs, for example easing the current
2 of 3
28/08/2019, 09:59

Trans-European energy infrastructure – evaluation of EU strategy |...
https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/initiatives/ares-2019...
strict limitations in terms of CBA, CBCA and commercial viability checks.
Another important improvement would be represented by the introduction of a “fast-track”
procedure for projects already PCI. In case no major context changes arise from one
selection to the following one, projects could only be monitored and not fully re-assessed.
This solution would provide stability of the list and credibility of the process while
guaranteeing organisational costs savings both for promoters and EC
Report an issue with this feedback
All feedback
The views and opinions expressed here are entirely those of the author(s) and do not reflect the official
opinion of the European Commission. The Commission cannot guarantee the accuracy of the information
contained in them. Neither the Commission, nor any person acting on the Commission’s behalf, may be
held responsible for the content or the information posted here. Views and opinions that violate the
Commission’s feedback rules will be removed from the site.
3 of 3
28/08/2019, 09:59