Issues: Europe

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

 

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

Hydrogen: Climate Fix Or Fossil Fuelled Fiction?

Categories

LNGJusticeFossil FuelsClimate

10 Reasons why hydrogen is a problem 

Read more here.

The aim of this briefing is to offer a clear and concise explanation of why hydrogen, regardless of how it is made, can create more problems than solutions for people and the planet. We have identified 10 key reasons that show why hydrogen poses serious climate, environmental and social justice risks.

The briefing highlights the problems with Europe’s move towards a hydrogen economy.

It shows how hydrogen, today largely made from fossil ‘natural’ gas, can be a safety hazard and a leaky climate issue.

While limited amounts of hydrogen might be needed in the future, the briefing shows how ‘green’ hydrogen could come with a troublesome track-record of land and resource-grabbing, unneeded infrastructure build-out, high energy bills and neocolonial practices that ultimately distract from urgently needed real solutions.

The briefing is a collection of easy-to-understand facts around hydrogen in the face of an oversized hydrogen boom fuelled by fossil fuel industry interests.

Want a sneak peek into the briefing? Here are the topics it adresses in 10 short chapters:

  • The Hydrogen Hype Hides a Greenwashing Scam
  • Hydrogen Infrastructure Could Become a Cash Cow for the Fossil Fuel Industry
  • Hydrogen Is Dangerous
  • Hydrogen Is a Climate Hazard
  • Hydrogen Has Negative Impacts on Natural Resources
  • Hydrogen Worsens the Neocolonial Dynamics of Our Current Energy System
  • Hydrogen Is an Uncertain Bet That Could Ultimately Benefit Polluters
  • Hydrogen Is Expensive
  • Hydrogen Is Linked to Dirty Fossil Fertilizers
  • Hydrogen Distracts From Real Solutions

 

Energy Imports: The Missing Piece of the EU Methane Regulation Puzzle

Categories

Fossil Fuels

An Independent Verification Body Required to Oversee Methane Emissions outside EU borders

Deep cuts to human-caused methane emissions are a top priority if we want to fix the climate crisis and slow the rate of global warming. Methane has more than 80 times the warming power of carbon dioxide (CO2) over a 20-year period after it reaches the atmosphere. Time is of the essence and we need to act now. The energy sector is responsible for roughly 40% of total anthropogenic methane emissions and oil, coal and fossil gas operations are the largest source of those emissions.

So far the provisions discussed in the EU Methane Regulation Proposal to tackle emissions across the whole supply chain only include an information obligation for importers and are based on a weak verification system, referring to the UNEP-led International Methane Emissions Observatory (IMEO) as verifier body (article 10 of the Methane Regulation Proposal). This is not good news, considering its position is biased because of its connections with fossil fuel industries.

The Methane Proposal needs to be a bold instrument to cut methane emissions across the entire supply chain, while phasing out fossil gas by 2035 and accelerating the transition towards 100% renewables.

Extending the EU domestic provisions on Monitoring, Reporting, and Verification (MRV), Leak Detection and Repair (LDAR), and Limits on Routine Venting and Flaring (LRVF) to operators located outside the EU is legally possible.

Together with CAN-Europe, we co-wrote a fact sheet highlighting the importance of slashing methane emissions from energy imports and the need for an independent verification system detached from fossil fuel industry interests.

“Given the powerful warming potential of methane and the fact that it is leaking across the supply chain, especially upstream at extraction level, requires urgent action outside EU borders. More than 80% of the fossil gas consumed in the EU comes from third countries responsible for 75 to 90% of the energy sector’s methane emissions. A recent report shows that legally speaking it is feasible to apply measures on non-EU operators placing products on the EU market. Policy makers cannot shut their eyes on what’s happening outside EU borders and need to push through rules to bring down domestic but also external methane emissions stemming from imports.” (Enrico Donda – Gas Campaigner, Food & Water Action Europe)     

 

“Given the powerful warming potential of methane and the fact that it is leaking across the supply chain, especially upstream at extraction level, requires urgent action outside EU borders. More than 80% of the fossil gas consumed in the EU comes from third countries responsible for 75 to 90% of the energy sector’s methane emissions. A recent report shows that legally speaking it is feasible to apply measures on non-EU operators placing products on the EU market. Policy makers cannot shut their eyes on what’s happening outside EU borders and need to push through rules to bring down domestic but also external methane emissions stemming from imports.” (Esther Bollendorff, Gas Policy Expert at Climate Action Network Europe)     

LNG – Der Flüssige Weg ins Klimachaos

Categories

Fossil Fuels

 

Hier geht’s zum LNG-Papier (Deutsch).

‘Liquefied Natural Gas’ (LNG) – Flüssigerdgas steht im Rampenlicht. Die Kosten für fossiles Gas steigen seit 2021 und die furchtbare Invasion der Ukraine durch russische Streitkräfte zwingt Regierungen sich mit der Frage zu befassen, wie die Abhängigkeit Europas von fossilen Energieträgern aus Russland beendet werden kann. Zusammen mit der Notwendigkeit so schnell wie möglich von fossilen Brennstoffen wegzukommen, um die Auswirkungen des Klimawandels zu begrenzen und die globale Erwärmung unter 1,5°C zu halten, haben diese Realitäten Aufregung um LNG erzeugt. Was jedoch ist LNG und warum ist es wichtig? Das vorliegende Papier ist als Warnung davor zu verstehen, was die Ausbreitung von LNG als vermeintliche Lösung für Fragen der Energiesicherheit in Europa anrichten könnte. Es wird zehn Hauptargumente anführen, die die zahlreichen Probleme aufzeigen, die LNG mit sich bringt.

Lesen Sie hier das LNG-Papier auf Deutsch

LNG: The Liquid Path to Climate Chaos

Categories

Fossil Fuels

10 reasons why liquified fossil gas is the wrong choice for Europe

Read full report here.

“Liquefied Natural Gas” (LNG) has been thrown into the spotlight. The cost of fossil gas has been rising since 2021 and the horrific invasion of Ukraine by Russian troops has forced governments to grapple with how to end Europe’s fossil fuel dependency on Russia. Together with the need to get off fossil fuels as soon as possible in order to mitigate the impacts of climate change and keep global warming to below 1,5 degrees, these realities have created a buzz around LNG. But what is LNG and why does it matter? This briefing looks to raise the alarm bell around the roll out of LNG across Europe as an attempt to tackle energy security concerns. It will put forward ten key arguments that showcase the host of problems LNG brings.

 The briefing has is also available in Croatian, Polish, Spanish and Galician, German, French and Greek

But first, an explanation of what LNG actually is. 

LNG simply refers to fossil gas which is transported not through pipelines in a gaseous form, but which is chilled to minus 162°C in order to be liquefied and transported large distances by ships. 

This means that when we talk about LNG in Europe, we are talking about gas that is extracted, converted into liquid form, shipped across an ocean, converted back into gaseous form, then pumped through the European gas grid to eventually heat and cool homes, and power industry activities. 

These LNG imports made up 20.5% of Europe’s fossil gas consumption in 20211 and with pressure to end imports of Russian gas, governments are looking to LNG from non-Russian sources to meet demand. 

Moves to get off Russian gas are necessary and urgent to help end the war in Ukraine by reducing the income Putin has for his war machine. Yet, we must also be cautious of letting short-term energy supply concerns lock Europe into long-term costly deals that trap consumers into more dirty fossil fuel infrastructure and energy dependencies in the future.

Long-term fossil gas use is incompatible with a safe climate and this needs to be the turning point when Europe moves away from fossil fuels once and for all. 

This briefing provides counterarguments to the overinflated role that LNG is being positioned to have in Europe’s energy future, and shows instead that this is a dangerous distraction from the just energy transition to renewables that is so desperately needed.