REPowerEU: Updating EU Legislation to Make the EU Independent from Russian Fossil Fuels

ClientEarth argues that the proposed amendments to the RRF Regulation to support REPowerEU create an unlawful 'preferential treatment' for fossil gas and oil infrastructure. The organization contends that the Commission bypassed the TEN-E Regulation's transparency requirements by relying on a 'wish list' from the industry-led ENTSOG, and that exempting these projects from the 'Do No Significant Harm' (DNSH) principle violates EU environmental law and the European Climate Law. ClientEarth further asserts that the lack of impact and climate assessments for the proposal is unjustifiable, regardless of the urgency of energy security needs.

• The Commission is accused of circumventing transparency and stakeholder participation requirements by relying on the European Network of Transmission System Operators for Gas (ENTSOG) to identify fossil fuel projects for funding. ClientEarth notes that the Commission omitted the legal basis for trans-European networks (Articles 170 to 172 TFEU) from its proposal, effectively ignoring the TEN-E Regulation's mandates for 'open and transparent' consultation.
• The proposed funding for fossil fuel infrastructure includes approximately 10 billion euros for fossil gas projects and between 1.5 to 2 billion euros for oil projects, based on analysis from ENTSOG that has not been made public.
• ClientEarth argues that ENTSOG is an inappropriate body to unilaterally identify necessary infrastructure because its members are from the fossil gas industry and are 'structurally incentivised' to increase revenues through new infrastructure.
• The proposed exemption of select fossil fuel projects from the 'Do No Significant Harm' (DNSH) principle is described as unlawful and discriminatory. ClientEarth asserts this violates the European Climate Law's requirement to 'prioritise swift and predictable emission reductions' and creates an 'absurd precedent' by favoring damaging projects over renewables or energy efficiency initiatives.
• The DNSH exemption may undermine State aid rules, specifically the Guidelines on State aid for climate, environmental protection and energy (CEEAG). Because the CEEAG's compatibility assessments closely track the DNSH test, exempting projects from DNSH under the RRF creates a contradiction or a loophole that encourages 'gamesmanship' by Member States.
• The Commission failed to conduct a climate assessment or an impact assessment for the Proposed Regulation, citing 'the urgent nature of the proposal' as justification. ClientEarth argues that urgency does not excuse the failure to assess significant economic, environmental, or social impacts as required by the Inter-Institutional Agreement on Better Law-Making and the European Climate Law.

APA

Burman, T. (2022). REPowerEU: Updating EU Legislation to Make the EU Independent from Russian Fossil Fuels. ClientEarth. https://www.clientearth.org/media/zkwjwc5t/clientearth-comments-repowereu-regulation-proposal_2022.pdf

Chicago

Burman, Thomas. REPowerEU: Updating EU Legislation to Make the EU Independent from Russian Fossil Fuels. ClientEarth, 2022. https://www.clientearth.org/media/zkwjwc5t/clientearth-comments-repowereu-regulation-proposal_2022.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite press release |last1=Burman |first1=Thomas |title=REPowerEU: Updating EU Legislation to Make the EU Independent from Russian Fossil Fuels |publisher=ClientEarth |date=July 2022 |url=https://www.clientearth.org/media/zkwjwc5t/clientearth-comments-repowereu-regulation-proposal_2022.pdf |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@misc{burman2022repowereu, author = {Burman, Thomas}, title = {{REPowerEU: Updating EU Legislation to Make the EU Independent from Russian Fossil Fuels}}, publisher = {ClientEarth}, year = {2022}, month = jul, url = {https://www.clientearth.org/media/zkwjwc5t/clientearth-comments-repowereu-regulation-proposal_2022.pdf}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }