Hydrogen produced from electricity of nuclear origin, the so-called pink hydrogen, will also receive the long-awaited renewable label and not only that generated from wind or photovoltaic. This is what the European Commission proposed yesterday, which has finally aligned itself with the position of France and against the theses defended by Germany and Spain, which proposed a stricter definition that only recognized this fuel as green when the necessary electrolysis process to generate it, it feeds on electricity produced from renewable sources.
The argument that nuclear energy is low in CO2 emissions and that the ultimate goal of European energy policy is decarbonisation has been key to the Brussels conclusion. Being what is legally known as a delegated act, the Commission proposal can only be approved or rejected by the Council and the European Parliament, not amended. The deadline for the institutions to make a decision is two months, extendable up to four. The debate is reminiscent of the one generated when Brussels agreed to classify investments in gas or nuclear facilities as green, as transition technologies; The proposal, which has been appealed in court, was finally supported by both the Parliament and the governments.
In this case, Brussels proposes considering renewable hydrogen that which is manufactured with 90% renewable electricity and classifying as "low carbon hydrogen" that derived from "non-renewable sources that produce at least 70% less greenhouse gas emissions than fossil natural gas throughout its entire life cycle”, a condition that gas of nuclear origin would meet. It also introduces criteria to guarantee that hydrogen is only produced when and where there is sufficient availability of renewables and proposes a method of calculating the total emissions of electricity generation in the network that in certain countries, such as France or Sweden, would make it unnecessary to prove the percentage of reduction.
The classification that the EU gives to hydrogen will have direct consequences for the future gas pipeline known as H2Med agreed upon by the leaders of Spain, France and Germany in December. Although the Brussels proposal is clearly aligned with the interests of Paris, the French government, which has accused its partners of violating an alleged pact to support it in this battle in the EU, continues to say that as long as the European regulation is not clarified the project is at risk, reports Eusebio Val.
"If France cannot produce hydrogen because of European rules, the economic viability of the project will be questioned, because if there is no hydrogen to put in the tube, it will not make economic sense to build the tube," said sources from the cabinet of the minister of the Energy Transition, Agnès Pannier-Runacher. According to the same sources, "we must avoid an ideological approach and have a pragmatic approach." "To develop infrastructures and fill them with hydrogen, you have to produce it, and to produce it you need the electricity we have in France, which is abundant, at a good price and low in carbon, can also be used to produce hydrogen, in the same way that the Abundant electricity, at a good price and low in carbon produced in Spain”, adduced the aforementioned sources.
Meanwhile, governments continue to take positions regarding the future reform of the European electricity market. Germany and half a dozen countries (Denmark, the Netherlands, Finland, Luxembourg, Latvia and Estonia) wrote yesterday to the European Commission to defend that the EU should not rush and approve "in crisis mode" a regulatory review that is as far-reaching as this, contrary to what Spain defends, which considers it a priority to change the pricing model.
