The blockade against gas production off the coast of Borkum is currently dominating the energy policy debate. Leading Green environment ministers are pursuing resistance, even though LNG imports from overseas remain accepted. This blockade reinforces the impression of political double standards, as the North Sea is given priority for protection, while gas production in distant regions receives political backing. At the same time, the supply situation remains strained, even though domestic gas production under strict standards appears possible.
Blockade in the Federal Council impacts energy policy
A blockade is forming in the Federal Council. Seven states governed by the Green Party are united in their opposition to the planned agreement with the Netherlands. This puts gas production off the coast of Borkum on the political sidelines, even though initial drilling on the Dutch side has been underway for months. The gas field lies beneath both German territories, but German approval is still lacking.
This blockade is officially based on legal and environmental arguments. However, critics point to a deliberate obstruction driven less by legal constraints than by political priorities. While natural gas extraction in the North Sea is considered a risk, the German government continues to accept LNG from third countries.
At the same time, representatives of the countries involved underscore their position by citing climate goals. Nevertheless, it remains unclear why gas extraction abroad faces fewer ethical hurdles. This question is increasingly dominating the discussion.
The North Sea as a Biased Protection Argument
The protection of the North Sea is a central argument. The sensitive ecosystem is considered particularly worthy of protection, and it is also home to the endangered harbor porpoise. But here, too, a tension arises. LNG often originates from regions with significantly weaker environmental regulations. Extraction there deeply impacts landscapes and pollutes the seas.
Patagonia provides a prime example. International gas projects there are severely impacting natural habitats. Yet Germany accepts liquefied natural gas without comparable debate. This approach reinforces the accusation of double standards, even if Green Party representatives rarely address the global context openly.
The North Sea thus receives special status, while other coastal areas appear to be politically ignored. This prioritization raises doubts about the consistency of environmental policy.
LNG Imports and Political Double Standards
LNG officially serves to ensure security of supply. Terminals on German coasts guarantee the supply. However, liquefied natural gas significantly worsens the climate footprint due to liquefaction and transport. Nevertheless, LNG is considered politically acceptable, while domestic gas production meets with resistance.
This double standard is particularly evident because Germany has little influence on environmental regulations in producing countries. In the North Sea, however, strict rules apply. Critics see this as a missed opportunity to take responsibility themselves instead of shifting the burden abroad.
Even within the Green Party, quiet unease is growing. Internally, voices point to the need for an honest overall assessment. While some delegates have focused on nature conservation, the international perspective often remains marginalized.
Gas Production Between Symbolic Politics and Reality
Gas production off the coast of Borkum is developing into a symbolic conflict. Supporters see it as a way to maintain a stable supply, while opponents defend a stance against fossil fuel projects. However, this stance is no substitute for a coherent strategy for the transition.
Moreover, the contribution of the production appears manageable, but it is there. At the same time, gas demand continues to rise, making LNG imports necessary. This contradiction reinforces the impression of political inconsistency.
The blockade thus takes on a new dimension. It affects not just a single project, but the credibility of German energy policy as a whole. Without transparent criteria for domestic and foreign gas production, trust is at risk of eroding.
Ultimately, there is an open question. Environmental policy demands global standards, not selective borders. As long as the blockade off Borkum is more stringent than criticism of production projects in the Arctic Ocean on distant continents, the accusation of double standards will persist.