For most EU member states, the only constructive note in the ongoing energy debate is the long-awaited intervention by the European Commission on gas pricing. The discussion centers on three core elements—design, prices, and conditions—described by Teresa Ribera, Spain’s third vice president and minister for ecological transition, as poorly planned. She warned that the proposal seems crafted to guarantee it will never be put into practice and suggested, in no uncertain terms, that from a Spanish perspective the plan could be a political joke. These remarks were delivered as she arrived for an extraordinary energy ministers’ meeting that is set to first review the bill introduced on Tuesday.
She argued that the Brussels plan would be impractical and ineffective, and that it falls outside the mandates repeatedly emphasized by the Energy Council and the Council of Europe. Specifically, she criticized the price ceiling that would trigger the corrective mechanism as unrealistic at 275 euros per megawatt hour for a two-week period. In her view, a price level so high that it would seldom be reached cannot be required to guide policy. She noted that forecasts of this kind did not materialize in the summer because the threshold would need to be exceeded for 15 consecutive days. Crossing that threshold, she said, would signal a European energy crisis so severe that the market recovery might be jeopardized. Ribera urged instead a dynamic price approach that would reflect real-time international market movements and include a supplementary bonus.
Ribera did not stop there. She argued that the Brussels design could produce the opposite effect of what is intended: rather than fostering lower prices to spur growth, the plan risks complicating the energy landscape because national positions remain divided. She observed that a broad majority of member states are concerned by the Commission’s slow reaction to the mandates it has received from the Council of Europe and the Energy Council. The impression, she said, is that momentum is insufficient to meet the urgency of the moment.
emergency and renewable
Beyond the price ceiling, two additional regulatory proposals are on the agenda. The first concerns an emergency framework that includes solidarity measures and the option of joint gas purchases, a package Brussels put forward in October. The second focuses on accelerating the deployment of renewable energy. Both are intimately connected to the issue of gas pricing, Ribera explained. She contended that supporting this broader package without clear guidance on the general path for gas purchases would be a strategic mistake. In her view, the three elements—emergency measures, renewable acceleration, and price paths—must be addressed in a single, integrated decision to avoid creating uncertainty.
According to the Spanish representative, leaving any one piece out could provoke sharp disputes between supporters of renewables and environmental advocates. She suggested that the prudent course is to advance the technical work and aim for consensus on three interlinked points within the next two to three weeks. She stressed that it would be unwise to back two important but partial proposals while leaving open what the overall price trajectory should be. The recommendation was clear: embrace all three components together to prevent a piecemeal approach from undermining the policy’s goals.