Power Transition Tracker

Context around the project:

• Will primarily run on fossil gas, with plans to blend up to 30% hydrogen.
• Supported by the Italian government, framing hydrogen blend as part of its decarbonization strategy.

What is the problem?

• Will primarily burn gas, contributing to long-term fossil gas lock-in.
• Even at 70% gas reliance, the facility will still be a major source of CO2.
• Reliable supply of green hydrogen does not exist and burning hydrogen in power plants is inefficient.

Context around the project:

• Still in its pre-construction phase, despite obtaining all necessary authorisations and legal approvals.
• Project classified as a strategic infrastructure investment under a national law, making the LNG terminal of public interest and its hypothetical construction “urgent and necessary”.

What is the problem?

• Goes against the current trend of decline in fossil gas demand in Europe.
• Raises questions about the alignment of the project with Enel’s long-term sustainability goals.
• Project at huge environmental and cost risks, requiring significant land reclamation, waste management, and mitigation of environmental degradation.

Context around the project:

• Said to be “H2-ready”
• Facing local opposition

What is the problem?

• The national government has committed to decarbonize its power sector by 2035. 
• The Netherlands – and more widely the EU – does not need new fossil gas plants to ensure its electricity supply.
• Limited availability of green hydrogen and low efficiency for power.

Context around the project:

• Project is said to be “H2-ready”.
• Has sparked strong opposition from residents and environmental groups
• The Po Valley is one of the most polluted areas in Italy

What is the problem?

• Italy – and more widely the EU – does not need new fossil gas plants to ensure its electricity supply.
• Negative impacts on air quality and public health.
• Locks the region in a long-term reliance on fossil gas instead of transitioning to renewable energy.

Context around the project:

• Replacement of decommissioned lignite units.
• Concerns over water shortages being further aggravated by the changing climate.
• The plan to bring additional water via a 30 km pipeline from Jeziorsko reservoir is facing legal restrictions due to environmental law.

What is the problem?

• Located in a drought-stricken region heavily impacted by open-pit lignite mines that have disrupted water levels and caused local lakes to shrink.
• The new gas plant needs 11 million m³ of water a year for cooling, which could cause the Kielbaska local river to disappear, dealing another blow to local ecosystems and causing problems for livestock farming.

Context around the project:

• There are no official plans to transition the existing gas power station already operating in Peterhead. It is already Scotland’s biggest climate polluter.
• Addition of carbon capture and storage (CCS) technology to the new plant planned at a later date. This will be the third attempt to make CCS work at the Peterhead power plant with two previous failures in 2007 and 2015.

What is the problem?

• It will generate vast quantities of climate-wrecking emissions for the next 25 years or more – well past 2045 when Scotland is supposed to reach net zero. 
• The existing and the new plants could operate at the same time.
• CCS has a long history of being over-promised and under-delivered by major polluters. It will not reduce other harmful pollutants like methane and ammonia.
• The plan to store any captured carbon under the North Sea is fraught with difficulties and unknowns and could help turn that region into Europe’s carbon dumping ground.