Among the many issues that the war in Ukraine has disrupted, the supply of energy is one of the greatest concerns for the governments of the European Union. The Russian threat to cut gas tap it forces countries to look for alternatives, even where they had previously been ruled out. It is in this context that Germany’s interest in building a large gas pipeline connecting Spain with Central European countries must be understood. This gas pipeline – which would mean recovering the parked project MidCat– has awakened old differences between countries, evidencing the lack of a European energy strategy, which weakens the EU in the defense of their common interests before third parties. The episode could strain the Franco-German axis relationship, if Paris reaffirms its traditional opposition to the gas interconnection that the Germans yearn for. For Spain, it would represent a greater role as a supplier of gas to Europe, which is why it has the favorable position of the central government, with the logical demand that it be financed with European funds, that is, that it is not only the Spanish taxpayers who pay for an infrastructure that will benefit the energy security of the EU as a whole. Also from Catalonia, the Government and the Foment employers see it with good eyes.
The MidCat is a project started more than 20 years agowhich crossed the Pyrenees through Girona but was never completed, because the Spanish and French competition authorities knocked it down in 2019, considering that there were no market needs to justify it. So the gas that came from Russia was reliable and cheap, and the new infrastructure, very expensive and without commercial interest. Needless to say, circumstances have radically changed. Spain has the majority of liquefied gas transformer plants in the EU, in addition to the gas pipeline connection with Algeria, but its export capacity is today very limited by the two gas pipelines that connect it today with France. The MidCat would allow this capacity to be doubled. The arguments put forward by the Government of Emmanuel Macron (that it is a very expensive project, that it will not solve the current energy crisis and that it will mean a step backwards in the decarbonisation objective, among other reasons) may be reasons to review and improve this strategic project , but not to block it.
As for the climate challenge, for example, those who warn of the setback that investing in fossil fuels entails (also Germany has done it with the return to coal-fired power stations), are not without reason, but today, renewable energies are not capable of meeting all the demand and the transition process will be long. In the case of the new MidCat, there is also the intention, if the technology allows it, that it can serve not only to transport gas, but also liquid hydrogen, which would make it an infrastructure compatible with a green economy.
It is true that the slow pace of execution of the project will make it impossible for it to resolve the urgent problems of the conflict with Russia, but it is not so much a question of providing an immediate solution, but of move towards greater energy policy integration that allows the EU to give a better response to future crises. Something that will not be achieved if each country looks only for its own convenience.