The current energy crisis as seen in Europe has been laid bare in Belgium over the past few days. At the same time as politicians and diplomats try to agree to further curb CO2 emissions at the #COP26 conference in Scotland, the Belgian federal government decided to allocate subsidies to French company ENGIE to build two gas-fired power stations. And against the odds, it is the environmental groups that celebrate this move.
The reason is nuclear. Belgium doesn’t have the luxury of its own fossil fuels – similar to France – and together with the French chose to rely on nuclear power to meet electricity demand. It is no surprise that nuclear also got more and more scrutinised from an environmental point of view in recent years, which has led the Belgian government to decide to phase out nuclear by 2025.
In turn, this sparked a quest for ways to replace the imminent gap in electricity supply. With the government’s decision to grant subsidies to French energy giant ENGIE to now build two gas-fired power stations in order to close this gap, Belgium is on a pathway to emit more CO2 than it did before.
The fact that this move is being celebrated by the green parties in Belgium is a good example of how complex the energy transition is. In addition to having to import more gas, it will also have to come from further afield. The Groningen field in the Netherlands used to be a trustworthy source of gas from not too far away. With Groningen being shut in in the years to come, gas has to be imported from more distant sources, which also means an additional CO2 footprint.
There are many voices in Belgium speaking up against the decision to phase out nuclear. As Manuel Sintubin, a well-known geologist from the University of Leuven and very active on Twitter, put it in a message on November 1st: #Belgiumgoesfossil.
HENK KOMBRINK
