With a possible Brexit looming large on the political horizon, many energy companies, whether oil, gas or power, are becoming increasingly concerned about its negative impact on the UK and broader EU.

They argue that a period of relative stability in which the evolving EU energy market has made a significant contribution to ensuring security of supply, sustainability and lower energy prices, will be replaced by one characterised by greater risk and uncertainty. In addition, the reduced influence for the UK, would mean the EU would lose the weight of one of the key drivers behind energy market liberalisation. But are they right?

In terms of security of supply, the UK is increasingly connected to the continent. Thanks to the so-called gas and power interconnectors with France, Belgium, Ireland and Norway, a significant trade has now grown up and an increasing portion of the UK’s gas and power needs are supplied through these interconnectors. The European network codes, which regulate cross-border trade of power and gas through interconnectors, are crucial and complex issues will arise as to whether or not the interconnectors between the UK and the continent will continue to be bound by these codes.

It is also difficult to predict the extent to which the UK, in the event of a Brexit, will still be able to influence decisions around the development of these codes. Much will depend on whether the UK will negotiate to remain part of the institutions involved, including the European Network of Transmission System Operators and the European Energy regulator, ACER.

But there is now bona fide concern around safeguarding the continued development of new interconnectors, of which there are currently several in the pipeline. Significant up-front investment is required if these projects are to proceed. As all investors like long-term predictability – and Brexit is a major risk factor – investments in these projects could be seriously affected.

Another area of uncertainty relates to investment support by the European Investment Bank (EIB). In 2014, the EIB invested €7 billion into the UK economy and energy projects accounted for around 50% of that. Whether this type of investment will be possible post-Brexit is a real concern, and for those projects that have already secured funding, there is the possibility that a repayment may be demanded.

In terms of gas supply, the UK is increasingly dependent on supplies from Russia, both importing directly from Russia and indirectly via other European countries. Of course, the ultimate aim of the EU’s Energy Union is to loosen Russia’s stranglehold on Europe’s gas supplies by pooling resources. In the event of Brexit the UK would be more exposed from an energy security perspective in relation to Russia and, minus the UK, the position of the EU towards Russia would also be weakened. Of course, Brexiters are fond of asserting that the UK’s fossil fuel energy needs could be easily satisfied by, for example, shipping more gas into Britain from Qatar, but this does not stand up to critical scrutiny.

On sustainability, currently the UK adheres to the EU’s climate and energy policies, of which key elements are targets for 2020 and 2030 for CO2 reduction and renewables. Post Brexit it is unlikely that the UK would radically change its climate ambitions but, given the fact that the UK has never been a strong advocate for EU renewables targets, the abandonment of these targets may serve to undermine the investment climate for renewables.

As far as the EU’s Emissions Trading Scheme is concerned, the impact of Brexit would probably be limited. Given the fact that the scheme already covers emissions from three non-EU countries, and that the UK’s climate policies are inextricably to it, the most likely scenario is that the UK would remain within the Emissions Trading Scheme. The ability of the UK to influence how the scheme develops in the future would however be severely limited.

It has been claimed by Amber Rudd, the UK’s Energy Secretary, that energy bills in the UK would soar by £500 million a year after a Brexit. Many have however argued that this would only be the case if the UK leaves the internal energy market, and it is not clear to what extent that will be the case. What is much clearer, however, is that without the UK, supporters of energy market liberalisation within the EU will have lost a key champion, and European businesses and consumers are less likely to enjoy the cost benefits derived from increased competition and market liquidity.

The uncertainty and increased complexity that results from Brexit, and the marginalisation of the UK in terms of EU policy and regulation, will negatively impact on business in both the UK and EU. If it comes to pass, Brexit will need to be carefully managed if we are to minimise this negative impact. Conversely, a decision to remain inside the EU would create an opportunity for the UK, with support from likeminded countries, to positively reengage in Europe and more proactively push its energy liberalisation agenda.

(Bas Batelaan, energy policy specialist & Aspect Consulting Associate Director; follow on twitter @EUlobby)

https://www.neweurope.eu/article/spectre-brexit-clouds-europes-energy-future/