Disputes Over the Pipelines Importing Russian Gas to the EU: How to Ensure Consistency in EU Energy Law and Policy?

Europe is divided on how to construct and exploit pipelines importing Russian gas to the EU. The division evinces two opposing models, which I label (1) the Overcapacity and Exemption-Based Model and (2) the Optimal Capacity and Regulatory-Based Model. As those labels suggest, these models are premi...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Szydło Marek
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Sciendo 2018-12-01
Series:Baltic Journal of Law & Politics
Subjects:
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.2478/bjlp-2018-0012
id doaj-c106e785fa8b445aaeb757ca32ceef7e
record_format Article
spelling doaj-c106e785fa8b445aaeb757ca32ceef7e2021-09-05T21:00:29ZengSciendoBaltic Journal of Law & Politics2029-04542018-12-011129512610.2478/bjlp-2018-0012bjlp-2018-0012Disputes Over the Pipelines Importing Russian Gas to the EU: How to Ensure Consistency in EU Energy Law and Policy?Szydło Marek0Professor; Dr. Hab. University of Wrocław, Faculty of Law, Administration and Economics (Poland)Europe is divided on how to construct and exploit pipelines importing Russian gas to the EU. The division evinces two opposing models, which I label (1) the Overcapacity and Exemption-Based Model and (2) the Optimal Capacity and Regulatory-Based Model. As those labels suggest, these models are premised on different assumptions as to the number and capacity of such pipelines that the EU requires, and as to how far those pipelines should be subject to EU energy law. The struggle between these models is not merely a legal one. More fundamentally, it is an economic and geopolitical one involving a wide range of stakeholders: public and private. This article evaluates the two models. By describing the legal disputes concerning OPAL and Nord Stream 2 and analysing their wider legal, economic and geopolitical implications, it argues that the second model (Optimal Capacity and Regulatory-Based) is clearly superior in today’s context. It is fully aligned with the objectives and provisions of EU energy law. In particular, it is consistent with that law’s aim of diversifying the external suppliers, sources and routes of gas supplies available to the EU. This article concludes that this latter model must win in the OPAL and Nord Stream 2 disputes, and, moreover, that it must be implemented with respect to all eastern import pipelines and connected pipelines before any further pro-competitive or pro-integrative reforms to the EU’s energy law and policy.https://doi.org/10.2478/bjlp-2018-0012eu energy policyenergy securitygas marketsdiversification of gas supplies
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Szydło Marek
spellingShingle Szydło Marek
Disputes Over the Pipelines Importing Russian Gas to the EU: How to Ensure Consistency in EU Energy Law and Policy?
Baltic Journal of Law & Politics
eu energy policy
energy security
gas markets
diversification of gas supplies
author_facet Szydło Marek
author_sort Szydło Marek
title Disputes Over the Pipelines Importing Russian Gas to the EU: How to Ensure Consistency in EU Energy Law and Policy?
title_short Disputes Over the Pipelines Importing Russian Gas to the EU: How to Ensure Consistency in EU Energy Law and Policy?
title_full Disputes Over the Pipelines Importing Russian Gas to the EU: How to Ensure Consistency in EU Energy Law and Policy?
title_fullStr Disputes Over the Pipelines Importing Russian Gas to the EU: How to Ensure Consistency in EU Energy Law and Policy?
title_full_unstemmed Disputes Over the Pipelines Importing Russian Gas to the EU: How to Ensure Consistency in EU Energy Law and Policy?
title_sort disputes over the pipelines importing russian gas to the eu: how to ensure consistency in eu energy law and policy?
publisher Sciendo
series Baltic Journal of Law & Politics
issn 2029-0454
publishDate 2018-12-01
description Europe is divided on how to construct and exploit pipelines importing Russian gas to the EU. The division evinces two opposing models, which I label (1) the Overcapacity and Exemption-Based Model and (2) the Optimal Capacity and Regulatory-Based Model. As those labels suggest, these models are premised on different assumptions as to the number and capacity of such pipelines that the EU requires, and as to how far those pipelines should be subject to EU energy law. The struggle between these models is not merely a legal one. More fundamentally, it is an economic and geopolitical one involving a wide range of stakeholders: public and private. This article evaluates the two models. By describing the legal disputes concerning OPAL and Nord Stream 2 and analysing their wider legal, economic and geopolitical implications, it argues that the second model (Optimal Capacity and Regulatory-Based) is clearly superior in today’s context. It is fully aligned with the objectives and provisions of EU energy law. In particular, it is consistent with that law’s aim of diversifying the external suppliers, sources and routes of gas supplies available to the EU. This article concludes that this latter model must win in the OPAL and Nord Stream 2 disputes, and, moreover, that it must be implemented with respect to all eastern import pipelines and connected pipelines before any further pro-competitive or pro-integrative reforms to the EU’s energy law and policy.
topic eu energy policy
energy security
gas markets
diversification of gas supplies
url https://doi.org/10.2478/bjlp-2018-0012
work_keys_str_mv AT szydłomarek disputesoverthepipelinesimportingrussiangastotheeuhowtoensureconsistencyineuenergylawandpolicy
_version_ 1717782897704828928