Archives: Fact Sheets

Hallucinating hydrogen: Why the PCI/PMI process must be overhauled

Categories

Fossil FuelsDemocracyClimate

In December 2025, the European Commission published the second Projects of Common and Mutual Interest (PCI/PMI) aiming to grant priority status to a record number of cross-border hydrogen infrastructure projects. It includes 108 hydrogen related projects: 59 transmission pipelines, 21 electrolysers, 19 storage facilities and 9 reception terminals. Food & Water Action Europe and Bankwatch CEE analysed all hydrogen projects on the PCI/ list and compiled the alarming findings in this new report: “Hallucinating hydrogen: Why the PCI/PMI process must be overhauled”.

More than two-thirds of the hydrogen pipelines on the list – 42 out of 59 – are likely to transport fossil-fuel-based hydrogen for decades. And seven of them are rebranded gas projects. Few, if any, electrolyser projects are set to include additional renewable electricity capacity; most will rely on grid power, which risks cannibalising existing power generation. Although far from economically viable, hydrogen import terminals aim to receive mostly fossil-fuel-based ammonia. The use of hydrogen derived from fossil fuels will undermine the EU’s current plans to limit dependence on fossil fuel imports.

The scale of the planned hydrogen infrastructure far exceeds the current level of hydrogen economy development in the EU, and is out of touch with realistic forecasts for renewable hydrogen production and demand. This creates a serious risk of stranded assets if these projects are ever built. Even in the best case scenario, it would still mean wasting public funds on expensive feasibility studies and permitting procedures, which could amount to tens of millions of euros, based on recent Connecting Europe Facility (CEF) calls. 

Governance flaws in the TEN-E framework are one of the reasons for this outcome. ENTSOG retains control over infrastructure planning, scenario development and cost–benefit analyses, despite its clear conflicts of interest, which have been repeatedly flagged by the EU Agency for the Cooperation of Energy Regulators (ACER), the European Scientific Advisory Board on Climate Change (ESABCC) and civil society. The result is a self-reinforcing cycle in which gas incumbents define ‘system needs’, shape the methodology used to assess candidate projects, and then evaluate projects proposed by their own members. 

The Council and Parliament must reject the current Delegated Act on PCIs and PMIs, as it would support an oversized network running on fossil-based hydrogen. Alternatively, it risks creating costly stranded assets. 

Upcoming reforms to the TEN-E Regulation must curb the influence of the fossil-fuel industry, ensure democratic oversight, and end public funding for fossil-based hydrogen and related infrastructure. The EU’s hydrogen plans must focus on local and fully renewable production used only in sectors that cannot be directly electrified. Overall, the EU’s energy planning and financing must prioritise electrification and proven renewable technologies, such as interconnections, smart grids, and renewable integration, as the most efficient path to decarbonisation.

Check out the full report for more details!

DOWNLOAD PDF

 

New Two-Pager | Importing More LNG: A Costly Mistake for EU Economics

Categories

LNGFossil Fuels

Following last July’s publication of the unbranded guideline “LNG by the Numbers: Debunking the Economics” we have prepared a two-pager designed as an educational and advocacy tool to highlight the risks of relying on LNG as both an economic and energy security strategy. Backed by 10 groups, it aims to provide a clear, concise overview of why LNG is a bad economic bet. 

The document challenges the EU’s misguided pledge to channel $750 billion into U.S. energy imports, despite EU gas demand already falling by 20% over the past three years. Hitting that target would mean tripling imports of oil, coal, and LNG by 2025, an unrealistic surge that is also incompatible with climate goals.

Likewise, the EU’s temptation to copy the so-called “Japanese model” of LNG investment, an approach that proved economically unsustainable and even forced Japan to resell surplus LNG at a loss, is equally misplaced.

Instead of replacing Russian gas dependency with volatile, costly, and climate-damaging LNG, the EU should focus on grid modernization and the electrification of heating, transport, and industry, directing investment toward renewables and a just transition.

DOWNLOAD PDF

New Unbranded LNG Economic Visual Guide

Categories

LNGFossil Fuels

Food & Water Action Europe, together with 18 other groups, has endorsed an unbranded visual guide exposing the flawed economics of Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG).

The guide highlights why depending on LNG—a highly polluting and volatile fossil fuel—to power industry, heat homes, and cook meals is both an economic and environmental risk.

Following the EU’s efforts to reduce reliance on Russian gas, the region now faces a potential oversupply of LNG, increasing the risk of stranded assets and prolonged dependence on unstable foreign sources like U.S. LNG, which negatively impacts frontline communities and accelerates climate change.

The EU’s current plans to increase LNG imports—by supporting overseas export projects, particularly in the US, and committing to long-term contracts inspired by “Japanese model“—risks saddling consumers with higher energy costs and environmental damage.

Meanwhile, real solutions exist: It’s crucial to stop new LNG investments and accelerate the shift to clean, community-based solutions by investing in renewables, energy efficiency, and savings.

Check out the full report for more details!

DOWNLOAD PDF

Liquefied Lies: The Real Costs of Europe’s Liquefied ‘Natural’ Gas Addiction

Categories

LNGFossil FuelsClimate

Between 2021 and 2023, EU Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) imports doubled, now comprising about 40% of the bloc’s gas imports. LNG is neither clean nor cheap; it worsens climate change with high greenhouse gas and methane emissions, harms human health, and contributes to human rights abuses, particularly affecting marginalized communities in exporting countries.

Although LNG demand is expected to peak in 2024 and existing terminals are underutilized, the EU still plans to expand its LNG capacity to 406 bcm by 2030, deepening fossil fuel dependency.

With Mr. Trump reelected, trade policy shifts, energy market instability, and weakened environmental protections are expected, increasing LNG-related risks for communities and the climate.

Check out our briefing published with Friends of the Earth Europe (FoEE). 

DOWNLOAD PDF

LNG – LIQUEFIED FRACKED GAS: Unveiling the Toxic Truth Behind Europe’s LNG Obsession

Categories

LNGJusticeClimate

Together with Gas No Es Solución, we have examined the imports of U.S. Liquefied ‘Natural’ Gas (LNG) into the EU in 2023.

Last year, gas imports from the US accounted for nearly 23% of the total fossil gas consumption in the 13 EU countries that imported US LNG. Notably, the primary importers were the Netherlands, France, and Spain.When considering the entire EU-27, over 19% of the bloc’s total gas consumption is met by US LNG, which is almost entirely sourced from fracking.

Specifically, according to data from the US Energy Information Administration (E.I.A), 88% of gas produced in the US is extracted through hydraulic fracturing. If we apply this percentage to the total volume of US LNG imports, it means that in 2023, American fracked gas fulfilled over 17% of the total gas demand in the EU-27.

Following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, instead of transitioning to renewable energy and phasing out fossil fuels justly and swiftly, the EU has turned to US fossil gas, shifting the costs of pollution and environmental degradation to local communities there. The LNG boom poses a severe threat to the climate and frontline communities, further exacerbating the pollution of air, water, and soil largely caused by the activities of the petrochemical and fossil fuel industry. Fossil gas, no matter its origin, is no solution, and a new LNG lock-in will only delay the urgently needed transition to 100% renewables.  

Read the full briefing here.

Decoding the EU Methane Regulation

Categories

MethaneFossil FuelsClimate

Unveiling the Key Elements of the EU Methane Regulation Compromise Agreement

The aim of this analysis is to provide a tool for better understanding the key points of the compromise agreement on the EU Methane Regulation, as adopted by the EU institutions last November.

The regulation represents the EU’s first attempt to regulate methane emissions from the energy sector, with internal measures aimed at monitoring, reporting, and verifying (MRV), as well as detecting and repairing (LDAR) methane leaks, and limiting emissions from routine flaring and venting (LRVF) activities. The regulation also considers emissions from energy imports, as the EU is among the largest importers of fossil fuels globally, although it misses the opportunity to extend internal MRV, LDAR, and LRVF measures to imports.

Finally, the analysis also includes a comparison between EU emission reduction measures and those adopted in other countries that are among the EU’s main trading partners.

Read more here.