18.8.2023
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
C 293/11
3.
General comments 3.1.
The EESC stresses that the main cause of the crisis was the EU’s high dependence on Russia’s gas supplies and proposes setting a long-term vision which will make the EU less energy-dependent on third countries; this also includes independence with regard to clean technologies.
The EESC underscores that all EU and national measures must incentivise this strategic shift to secure Europe’s strategic autonomy.
3.2.
The EESC is well aware that the main priority is to address not only the consequences, but above all the reasons and causes of the crisis, and is ready to discuss and propose solutions.
This requires gradually moving away from the emergency measures to market-compatible and evidence-based reforms and investments, underpinned by sustainable and feasible strategic concepts.
Those strategic concepts must strike a balance between their priorities, financial sources (public and private) and the institutional environment and administrative conditions (permissions, compliance with EU and national legislation), and be based on adequate public support.
3.3.
The energy-saving measures made by households and businesses helped avert any serious risk of energy shortages.
However, it should not go unnoticed that some savings were made only because of the shutdown of business activities.
The most vulnerable industries in the crisis logically include the most energy-intensive ones (chemical industry, producers of fertilisers, steel industry and ironworks).
Special attention should be paid to them in terms of their energy transition as well as the risk of EU deindustrialisation (carbon leakage).
3.4.
The basis of the green transition is a strong and interconnected energy infrastructure, which has suffered severe underinvestment in recent years.
Infrastructure investment and upgrading will play a key role in the coming years.
Therefore, it is important that new rules send a clear and long-term signal to investors.
However, the capacity of SMEs to invest in the energy transition has been very limited since the initial crisis (COVID-19) broke out.
The reforms must respect the goals of the EU energy policy in terms of the green transition, resilience and social welfare, as well as the huge differences among the energy mix structures of particular Member States.
The crisis has had a serious impact on investment certainty.
3.5.
The EESC is convinced that the key reform requirements primarily include an update of the energy market design to allow for a sustainable green transition.
The EESC calls upon the co-legislators to reach a consensus on the main market design categories, directly influencing the future propensity to invest in this sector, including long-term contracts; supportive and incentive instruments for renewables; a model forming the basis of energy price generation and the issue of overall flexibility.
3.6.
The EU Green Deal, supplemented by the REPowerEU initiative, has the potential to invest approximately EUR 350 billion of yearly investments until the end of the decade (more than 2 % of the EU’s annual GDP).
The short-term EU investment forecast remains substantially weaker.
This requires additional financial resources to be mobilised in order to accommodate the priority investment needs.
These types of investments could be the trigger for a more robust EU economic recovery and for additional investment in infrastructure, digitalisation of energy networks, interconnection and storage capacities.
3.7.
The EESC is well aware that huge financial resources are needed for this process.
The green transition will not be possible without investment in research, innovation, infrastructure and people who should be properly prepared via education, upskilling and reskilling.
Despite the large sums under new EU financing programmes proposed for this purpose, national public and private sources are absolutely essential to make this a reality.
The EESC highlights a need for simple, efficient and easy-access financing and calls for innovative methods to engage private capital via financial instruments.
The EESC also takes into account the broadened role of State aid support and financing for a targeted purpose, but recommends ensuring a level playing field in the EU.
3.8.
EU governments earmarked and allocated EUR 758 billion to shield households and firms between September 2021 and January 2023.
Only a third of the fiscal interventions put in place by Member States were aimed at vulnerable categories.
The EESC recommends building on the ECB recommendations; a ‘Green triple-T’ criterion so that future interventions are tailored, targeted and transition-proof should be established.
Untargeted price measures were also defined by the IMF as setting the conditions for an extended period of higher inflation in the longer run.
Delaying their phasing out might compromise the ECB’s ability to achieve its medium-term objectives, resulting in monetary tightening for longer than is otherwise desirable.