Motives of europe‘s energy union creation and its perspectives

The master thesis “Motives of Europe‘s Energy Union Creation and its Perspectives” present analysis of recent developments which happened before and after creation of EU’s Energy Union. An assumption is made at the beginning that current challenges might be related to the level of national energy policies of EU members. Two main approaches deciding what national energy policy priorities are could be securization and competitiveness. Securization puts energy topic on the top of political agenda, allowing to implement projects which otherwise would be not technically or commercially viable. Competitiveness conception in national energy sector is based on country’s aim to have competitive advantage worldwide. If this approach is chosen, security in all the aspects becomes issue of secondary importance. EU energy sector and Energy union was widely analyzed in academic researches during last few decades. Almost every author agrees that until 1996 and 1st Energy Package energy sector was exceptionally part of national policy of EU member states. Oil shocks impact, other successful EU unions which include Common Agriculture policy, Schengen agreement or Monetary Union which lead to creation of Eurozone, examples – nothing advocated to successful applying of the same rules and scope to newly created Energy union. Though Energy Union implementation struggles with unplanned challenges, common energy policies are successfully implemented EU-wide. To name a few it would be Renewable Energy Directive (accepted in 2009), Energy 2020 (2009), Energy Plan 2050 (2011), 2030 Framework for climate and energy (2014), Summer Package (2015) or Winter Package (2016). Therefore, 2015 marks not only presentation of EU’s Energy union, but also announcement about project, debates on which still divides EU into two large groups – supporters and opposing ones. It was named as Nord Stream expansion and later became Nord Stream 2. Project will allow to bypass East-West gas transportation corridor, creating new one in North-South direction. Nord Stream 2 eliminates Ukraine, Poland and Slovak Republic from the list of gas transit countries, and potentially jeopardizes their security of supply. New pipeline will go along the route of the first one, starting in Russia and ending in Germany, and will connect Gazprom with its clients in Western Europe. Poland sees this project as a threat to energy supply security, making Western Europe dependent on one single supplier. Country gives priority to diversification via gas interconnectors (Eustream, GIPL, Baltic Pipe) and Swinoujscie LNG terminal, which need was foreseen in Energy Union, but cannot influence Germany which uses competitive approach and claims Nord Stream 2 is purely commercial project, implemented by private companies. Germany needs cheap abundant natural gas implementing its national energy transition plan called Energiewende. It will result in coal and nuclear energy abandonment in favor of renewable energy sources (RES) like wind or solar. But increase of RES share in primary energy balance means need for back-up generation which could be based on natural gas. So for a long time – few decades - energy policy among EU members could be either part of security or competitiveness agendas, depending on particular state national priorities and energy policy chosen to conduct. If EU wants Energy Union to become typical political-economical union, it will have finally to name to which agenda energy sector should belong to. Member states would like to continue “business-as-usual”, so whatever decision will be made, it will face harsh resistance from the part of EU members