L 90/158
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
18.3.2022
(287) This methodology appears to be consistent with historical data and availability forecasts at the time of the analysis carried out.
(288) The French authorities estimated the need for natural gas storage in terms of 2 376 GWh/d in withdrawal rate associated with a filling level of 45 % of the working volume in order to cope with cold spells in the period between 2019 and 2025.
(289) However, as mentioned in recital (10), the decrease in spreads observed since 2009 has led to a drop in the take-up rate of storage capacity to below the level necessary to ensure security of supply, and resulted in three sites being placed on standby, despite the obligation for suppliers to maintain natural gas stocks.
(290) Consequently, it seems that the normal functioning of the gas storage market is not sufficient to maintain the storage infrastructure considered necessary to guarantee the security of supply required by France.
The aim of the aid scheme is thus to facilitate the development of natural gas storage activity in France, which would not be guaranteed simply by the normal functioning of the market.
6.4.2.
Limiting the negative impact of the aid scheme on the internal market (291) In the opening decision, the Commission established that the aid scheme introduced by the French authorities could have an impact on the following markets: (i) French natural gas suppliers and those of other Member States, (ii) natural gas storage operators, and LNG and interconnector operators, and (iii) French natural gas storage operators and those of other Member States.
(292) The Commission has assessed the factors that could contribute to limiting the negative impact of the measure in question, namely the necessity, appropriateness and proportionality of the mechanism, as well as its transparency.
(a) The necessity of the aid scheme
The Commission considers that State intervention is necessary if, in a given situation, such intervention can bring about a significant improvement which the normal functioning of the market alone would not bring about, for example, by correcting a well-defined market failure.
(293) As stated in recital (10), spreads have decreased since 2009 and storage operators are no longer able to cover their costs.
There was a risk that the economic activity of natural gas storage in France would be significantly reduced.
Since the implementation of the reform, the rate of storage of natural gas in France has in fact increased.
(294) Therefore, the Commission concludes that the reform was necessary to facilitate the development of the economic activity of natural gas storage in France.
(b) The appropriateness of the aid scheme (295) Aid is an appropriate policy instrument to facilitate an economic activity where it is not possible to achieve the same result through other policy instruments that cause fewer distortions of competition.
(296) Several alternative instruments were envisaged by France, but these would not facilitate the development of the economic activity of natural gas storage in France in the same way or guarantee the same level of security of supply for the following reasons.
(297) First, maintaining the previous system of storage obligations imposed on suppliers would not have ensured security of supply.
As the spread has become significantly lower than the cost of storage capacity, incentives to suppliers to reserve capacity have significantly decreased, resulting in three sites being placed on standby.
Placing other sites on standby would have been problematic since it emerged from the assessment of the need for storage that all facilities were necessary to ensure security of supply in the event of a prolonged cold spell.
Furthermore, the overall storage cost under the storage obligation system was higher ([EUR 5 to EUR 8/MWh in 2016 and 2017]) than under the regulatory mechanism (EUR 5,6/MWh after the reform).