War in Ukraine: how Europe’s gas lobby is exploiting fears over energy security

Europe’s gas industry has ramped up its messaging since Russia invaded Ukraine, DeSmog can reveal. It appears to be exploiting anxiety over energy security to justify projects that risk locking Europe into long-term dependence on fossil fuels.

Four of the industry’s lobby organisations began to post many more tweets portraying investments in gas and related infrastructure as the key to secure energy supplies soon after the invasion started. They maintained this strategy throughout last year.

The lobby groups were Gas Infrastructure Europe; Gas For Climate; Eurogas; and the European branch of the International Association of Oil & Gas Producers, which represent companies operating pipelines, gas storage, and infrastructure to import liquefied natural gas (LNG). Members include oil majors such as Shell, BP, TotalEnergies, Chevron, ExxonMobil, and Eni, which have posted record profits off the back of the energy crisis triggered by the invasion.

Climate advocates fear the tweets represent the tip of the iceberg of behind-closed-doors efforts to persuade European governments to back long-term investments in gas over the rollout of renewables and energy efficiency needed to achieve the European Union’s climate goals.

“The gas industry wants us to believe that more gas makes us more secure, but more gas leads to more climate change which in reality makes us less secure,” said Ben Franta, senior research fellow at the Oxford Sustainable Law Programme, who analyses legal strategies for holding fossil fuel producers accountable for their climate impacts.

“The gas industry is using today’s news — the war and the energy crisis — to try to lock in more gas for decades, even though the industry knows it’ll be disastrous for the climate and international stability,” he said.

“Big Boon”

The DeSmog analysis of 1,075 tweets by the four lobby groups showed that posts emphasising energy security, or the prospect of an energy shortage or crisis, accounted for about three percent of tweets in the 10 months prior to the invasion. That proportion shot up more than tenfold after the war started, with energy security–related messaging appearing in about a third of tweets from late February to December. Collectively, the four lobby groups have more than 15,000 followers. The tweets sometimes used hashtags such as #StrategicAutonomy or #SecurityOfSupply.

To keep moving on the #energytransition while ensuring #securityofsupply we need:

✅a skilled workforce,
✅CCUS scale up,
✅regulatory framework driving demand for #H2,
✅renewable gases ramp up,
✅LNG infrastructure.@EurogasJ at the CCUS & Hydrogen Decarbonisation Summit. pic.twitter.com/PsbDpm7Ke7

— Eurogas (@Eurogas_Eu) March 30, 2022

Russian President Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine last February 24 pushed gas prices to record levels; threatened to cripple European households; raised the prospect of winter shortages; and sent countries reliant on imports of Russian pipeline gas scrambling for alternatives.

Climate advocates acknowledged the need for emergency gas imports to bridge the gap as Europe rapidly weaned itself off its dependence on Russia.

But campaigners say the gas industry is exploiting a temporary crisis to revive long-standing plans to build new terminals to import LNG from suppliers from the U.S. Gulf Coast to Qatar to Australia, and lay new pipelines — hooking Europe on imported gas for decades to come.

That prospect appears to contradict EU climate targets, which imply a reduction in gas demand of at least 35 percent compared with 2019 levels by 2030. The emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) and methane associated with the projects will also undermine global climate goals, analysts warn.

“Before February 2022, it seemed that gas infrastructure projects were starting to flounder, gas was increasingly being seen as a non-viable investment in Europe due to climate targets, stranded asset threats, public protests,” said Greig Aitken of research and advocacy group Global Energy Monitor.

“The war has been a big boon for the European gas industry, and the gas exporting countries that the EU is now more dependent on,” Aitken said.

The surge in new projects risks generating over-capacity that will lead to stranded assets, Aitken warned. Since the invasion, the gas industry has announced that 195 billion cubic meters (bcm) per year in LNG import terminal capacity will come online by 2026, at a minimum cost of seven billion euros, according to Global Energy Monitor data. Before the war, by contrast, the EU imported 155 bcm of gas in 2021 from Russia, including LNG.

James Weston, secretary-general of Eurogas, which represents dozens of European gas companies and several U.S. LNG exporters, said the group’s members had a “serious responsibility” to respond to the energy crisis on behalf of consumers and industry.

“Next winter is going to come around very quickly and there is no room for complacency,” Weston said in an emailed statement. “Our door is open to all climate and energy stakeholders who want to join us in discourse about how we can best manage the dual crises of climate and energy security.”

Gas For Climate referred DeSmog to its website, which says that gas infrastructure would remain important through 2050 as the industry shifted to “renewable” and “low carbon” gases to meet the goals of the 2015 Paris climate agreement.

“Gas for Climate advocates a smart combination of electricity and gas in an integrated energy system to deliver an affordable transition to climate neutrality,” the website says.

Gas Infrastructure Europe and the International Association of Oil & Gas Producers did not respond to requests for comment. Both organisations say on their websites that they are supporting the sector to achieve climate neutrality.

Narrative Shift

The shift towards energy security messaging was most marked in posts by Gas Infrastructure Europe — which represents gas storage, pipeline, and LNG terminal operators — with almost half of the group’s post-invasion tweets discussing energy security.

Within the energy security messaging, DeSmog identified three broad arguments used by the four lobby groups: concerns about winter energy shortages; the need to protect consumers; and support for domestic gas production.

#Europe needs to diversify its #gas suppliers and strengthen its #energy autonomy.

How?