The recent gas deal between TotalEnergies and EPH has sparked intense debate about Europe's energy future. While the partnership aims to address the need for flexible power generation, critics argue it may inadvertently lock the continent into a decade of fossil fuel dependence. The deal, finalized on April 29, grants TotalEnergies a 50% stake in EPH's flexible power generation portfolio across France, Ireland, Italy, the Netherlands, and the UK. This includes 14 gigawatts of operational and under-construction power assets, with 12.5 GW designated for fossil gas-fired plants, equivalent to the combined gas power capacity of Belgium, Denmark, Portugal, and Sweden. The partnership comes with a price tag of around €5.1 billion, making EPH one of TotalEnergies' largest shareholders.
The Beyond Fossil Fuels (BFF) report warns that this venture could deepen Europe's reliance on costly imported fossil gas, increase energy bills, and hinder the clean energy transition. The report highlights that 87% of the joint venture's gas units use combined cycle gas turbine (CCGT) technology, which is less suited for rapid response and flexible demand compared to open cycle gas turbines (OCGT). CCGT plants are designed for sustained, efficient baseload energy generation, and when used for flexible demand, their durability and profitability suffer, leading to increased CO2 and air pollutant emissions.
Despite the concerns, gas still plays a significant role in European grid management. With renewable energy sources like wind and solar experiencing uncontrollable dips, gas-fired plants can quickly ramp up to bridge supply gaps. Natural gas consumption for power generation in Europe rose nearly 8% in 2025, driven by periods of low wind and hydro output. However, the long-term solution, according to ENTSO-E, lies in storage, smarter grid management, and unlocking flexibility from renewables.
The BFF report also reveals that over €4.08 billion in capacity market subsidies was allocated to the plants in the joint venture between 2015 and 2024. This funding, along with the deal's focus on gas trading, raises concerns about further dependency on fossil gas. TotalEnergies' core gas trading business and its estimated consumption of around two million tonnes of LNG per year suggest a guaranteed internal market for gas, benefiting the company's revenue streams.
Critics, like Brigitte Alarcon from BFF, argue that the deal will engineer further dependency on fossil gas, fueling the climate crisis and destabilizing the economy. The estimated cost of imports over a five-year period could reach €6.68 billion to €7.56 billion, primarily benefiting the US and Russian fossil industries. Additionally, the joint venture's climate emissions could match those of Ireland or Denmark in a year.
The deal's implications for Europe's energy security are concerning. BFF argues that it deepens rather than resolves energy insecurity, substituting dependence on Russian pipeline gas with globally traded LNG, which is still subject to geopolitical disruption and price volatility. As governments strive for a more secure energy future, the warning lights should be flashing for banks, urging them to exclude financial support for gas-fired power plants.
In conclusion, the TotalEnergies-EPH deal raises important questions about Europe's energy strategy. While it may provide short-term flexibility, the long-term consequences could be a prolonged reliance on fossil fuels, hindering the continent's transition to a sustainable energy future.
