It would be an interest to invest more in how to import LNG

Energy news: what do you think of the prospect of a new directive to give the Union "the means to respond to crises of supply of gas (1)"

Peter Claes: Rather than to resolve potential crises, must be first to reduce the risk of crisis and to ensure security of supply by diversifying our sources. Nearly half of the gas consumed in Europe comes from Russia and this proportion will increase. It would be an interest to invest more in how to import LNG. It would be costly but would diversify our sources - for example, a country such as the Qatar is very interested in proposing the gas in Europe, as well as the United States. Also, try to limit our consumption. Moreover, directive on security of supply of natural gas from entering into force, it is a little early to launch a new legislative initiative on the same subject.

E.n.: Should be more storage systems to better ensure security of supply

BW: It must obviously be a certain amount of storage, but in addition to the cost, it is very difficult to convince them of the usefulness of constructing such facilities as long as there is no problem. That said, manufacturers are aware that crisis there is very little likelihood that they have access to the storage. And they accept: If there is not enough gas in winter, the industry knows that it is not a priority for the gas and that it will give priority to domestic consumers.

E.n.: What do you think of the establishment of a mechanism of solidarity crisis (2)

BW: In principle, we support the strengthening of trans-European networks and the opportunities for Exchange of gas between Member States, so that the European system more robust and flexible. That said, imagine an explosion in Zeebrugge and that, for three weeks, the Belgium will be no access to gas. Would the France, the Germany or the Netherlands empty their stores for the Belgium Even if, for political reasons, the France received more Algerian gas, would it solve the problem by inter-country exchanges These questions are very political and the answers will depend on the circumstances of the crisis - technical or political.

E.n.: Is it according to the Commission or to the States, then to bilaterally implement the mechanisms of solidarity in case of emergency

BW: both! But the Commission should play a role more important on this matter... and, more generally, liberalization and energy policy because there is a huge lack of coordination at European level. Look at nuclear power: How do you want to have a single European market if the France continues to build power plants and the Germany farm The impact is such that it cannot leave this issue to Governments only to the single market. For gas, the lack of harmonization is visible at different levels: on the way to allocate capacity on networks, manage congestion, the pricing or the quality of the gas then again even that standards differ depending on the country...

E.n.: Is it to say that in the event of shortage, even providing a device of emergency between countries, would technically not be operational

BW: There may indeed be interoperability problems. Because it is the quality of the gas as the width of the rails of trains: it is not everywhere the same. For example, the United Kingdom gas contains more sulphur than the Netherlands. I don't know either if might be empty in France storage to provide this gas in Belgium, because it is not certain that the capacity of transport permits it to 100...

President, IFIEC Europe (International federation of industrial energy consumers)

1. In its March 8, 2006 Green Paper, the Commission is considering a legislative proposal which "would give the Union European ways to react according to the principle of solidarity between Member States in an emergency caused by a failure of supply of gas in the short term, taking into account the differences in storage capacity in the different regions of the Union European."

2. See note 1.