Ivana Maletić, member of the European Court of Auditors, said the REPowerEU energy security plan might underperform in its current shape. Library picture: Ivana Maletić is seen speaking at the European Parliament, 16 January 2020. Photo credit: European Parliament

Ivana Maletić, member of the European Court of Auditors, said the REPowerEU energy security plan might underperform in its current shape. Library picture: Ivana Maletić is seen speaking at the European Parliament, 16 January 2020. Photo credit: European Parliament

Europe’s plan to phase out Russian fossil fuel imports is poorly designed and troublingly underfunded, an EU spending watchdog has warned.

The European Court of Auditors has cast doubt on the effectiveness of the so-called REPowerEU scheme, which is meant to wean the EU off Russian gas, oil and coal imports.

The ECA said that “the success of REPowerEU will depend on” EU member states pulling off a series of interconnecting moves “and on securing financing of around €200bn.”

REPowerEU was approved by the European Council following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, but piggybacks on Recovery and Resilience Facility, which was originally designed to jumpstart the post-covid economy.

The European Commission has forecast that implementation of the REPowerEU programme to phase out Russian fossil fuel imports would cost €210bn, the ECA noted, but has only directly budgeted €20bn.

The rest of the money is meant to come from member states deciding to reroute RRF loans or reroute funds from other EU programmes, such as cohesion and rural development. “Consequently, the EU auditors warn that the total amount of funding actually available may be insufficient to cover estimated investment needs,” the ECA in an opinion paper published on 26 July.

Relying on the sums granted to member states under the RRF framework presents another problem, the ECA argued. Post-covid economic recovery objectives do not necessarily line up with energy infrastructure needs.

In addition: “The lack of any specific deadline for submitting the REPowerEU chapters reduces the likelihood of identifying and promoting cross-border projects.”

“Russia’s invasion of Ukraine turned the spotlight onto our dependence on gas, oil and coal imports, and the EU absolutely needed to act and respond swiftly to increased energy security concerns,” Ivana Maletić, the ECA member responsible for the opinion, stated. “But our view is that REPowerEU, in its current shape, might fail to quickly identify and implement EU strategic projects with immediate and highest impact on the EU energy security and independence.”

The European Court of Auditors checks that European funds are spent in line with EU rules. It has around 900 staff, mostly at its headquarters in Kirchberg.

Related articles