204 / 232
204 |
Ten Year Network Development Plan 2015
6.8 Conclusion
Compared to previous TYNDP editions, ENTSOG has
further developed its assessment methodology through
the improvement of the modelling approach, the
introduction of commodity prices, new scenarios and
indicators. At the same time, comparability with previ-
ous reports (TYNDPs, Supply Outlooks and GRIPs) has
been preserved. Results are consistent with previous
TYNDP assessments for the first part of the considered
period.
The results confirmed that most of Europe would benefit from a high level of infra-
structure-related market integration and thus competitive position and secure
supply, however, some areas are still isolated or not sufficiently interconnected. As
a result, they suffer from both a lack of system resilience and diversification. This
illustrates the link between security of supply and competition. For example, the
Eastern part of Europe is still highly dependent on Russian supply from both physi-
cal and price perspectives. The same applies to South-Western Europe for LNG
supplies. The Non-FID projects submitted by promoters have the potential to com-
plete the market integration of Europe.
The situation changes beyond 2025 with a smaller gap between expected supply
and demand especially under the Green scenario. The dependence on Russian gas,
and to a lesser extent on LNG, is growing over the whole of Europe. This indicates
that only new supplies would prevent Europe becoming more dependent on Russian
gas and LNG. Otherwise Europe, as a price taker, will have limited power to influence
gas prices.
Potential new sources of gas exist such as new conventional gas areas, shale gas
and biomethane. Barents Sea production can also mitigate this increasing depend-
ence if supplied to Europe through existing grid instead of being exported as LNG.
Producers in North Africa, Middle-East and Caspian regions are in the same situa-
tion with significant upstream and exporting investments required before they can
deliver additional volumes to Europe. All investments suffer from the current uncer-
tainty on the role of gas in the EU energy mix. Natural gas has the potential to guar-
antee a well-supplied market and to be more than a bridging-fuel. The lack of
recognition of such a potential hinders the triggering of new investment decisions in
capital intensive long lifetime assets. Timely decisions are necessary to establish a
fully developed internal gas market. Delayed investment decisions, given the lead
time before project commissioning, would mean that the current situation will
continue to deteriorate even with a stagnant gas demand.
Finally, gas power generation and the associated infrastructure have the potential to
complement different levels of development and use of RES power generation, but
new gas infrastructure will not significantly modify the competiveness of gas against
coal without changes to energy policy. Only projects connecting new markets will
induce the replacement of oil and LPG by gas in power generation. Only global
market conditions and political action can enable Europe to take full benefit of gas
as the best partner of RES.