The Bundestag and Bundesrat have decided to include the port of Mukran as a location for a liquefied natural gas terminal (LNG) in the relevant law. Parliament voted in Berlin on Friday for a corresponding amendment to the LNG Acceleration Act. This should enable faster approvals. The law then passed the Bundesrat. The state of Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania had tried in vain to stop the change in the law by calling the mediation committee. It did not receive a majority in the state chamber.
“To secure the energy supply, a new location will be included in Mukran on Rügen, where the feasibility for the import of LNG is becoming apparent and which can be further developed in the future for use of the port infrastructure and line with hydrogen and its derivatives,” it says Law.
The company Deutsche Regas wants to operate a floating import terminal for LNG in the port of Mukran near Sassnitz on behalf of the federal government. For this purpose, two special ships for the conversion of the liquid gas are to anchor there, one – the “Neptune” – is already in the port of Lubmin. Because of the easier landing, she is to move together with the so-called FRSU “Transgas Power”, which was secured in mid-June. Overall, Regas wants to ensure a total capacity of 13.5 billion cubic meters of natural gas annually.
Robert Habeck defends controversial plans
Federal Minister of Economics Robert Habeck defended the controversial plans. With a view to protests against the terminal, the Green politician spoke of a difficult consideration. But it is about securing Germany’s energy supply. “We’re not through yet.” Habeck said there is currently a stable gas supply situation, the gas storage facilities are already over 80 percent full. “As of today, we’re getting through the winter very well.” However, one should not rely on the fact that everything will always go well.
CDU MP Philipp Amthor accused the traffic light coalition of SPD, Greens and FDP of beating the project “with a crowbar” through parliament, which ignored the interests of the people. His party colleague Philipp Grundmann criticized the choice of location and the procedure: “We need LNG, we need liquid gas. It’s not about if, it’s all about how.” The AfD MP Leif-Erik Holm doubted the necessity of the project and referred to the local resistance: “The Rüganers are not selling off the Baltic Sea coast for a few glass beads from Berlin.” Ina Latendorf from the left complained: “People don’t feel they are being taken seriously, decisions should be made over their heads.”
Till Backhaus: “extremely sensitive space”
Bengt Bergt from the SPD, on the other hand, emphasized: “With the possibility for the Mukran location, we are creating security of supply for the whole of Germany.” The energy policy spokesman for the FDP parliamentary group, Michael Kruse, also referred to the security of supply: “We ensure that there are additional capacities and that we are not vulnerable.”
State Environment Minister Till Backhaus (SPD) made it clear in the Bundesrat that his state is making its contribution to Germany’s secure energy supply. “Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania already produces more than 100 percent more electricity than we consume in our own country. If all federal states had implemented this, we wouldn’t need LNG.” A privately operated liquid gas terminal was also built. And Rostock is ready to accommodate an LNG terminal.
But Rügen is an “extremely sensitive area,” said Backhaus. It is important to prevent massive slumps in tourism. The Environment Minister accused the federal government of having caused the debate about the project through a lack of communication and transparency. “People feel left out, they don’t feel taken, they feel reminded of the old days.”
In addition, a broad alliance of environmental associations, economists and the tourism industry has formed against the Mukran LNG terminal. In addition to possible effects on the environment and tourism, the need for additional import capacities is also questioned here.
