Is the gas price cap feasible? No (according to Clò)

On the occasion of the state visit to North Macedonia, President Sergio Mattarella used the authority that is recognized at the European level to support the cause of the price cap: a ceiling on gas prices. More or less in the same hours, at the conclusion of the summit of energy ministers, Roberto Cingolani took stock with the press on the results of the meeting where this problem was further discussed. It goes without saying that the minister favored the full part of the glass, as an important step forward, but he had to recognize that an agreement was still a long way off. So here are Mattarella's requests: “It is very urgent to proceed with the gas price ceiling and overcome the resistance that still exists in the EU, because it means putting families and businesses away from political and financial speculation. The crisis – added the head of state – is causing serious concern to families and businesses in the face of this unthinkable and reckless increase in energy prices. Italy has already proposed to the EU for 4 months a ceiling on the price of gas that other countries now understand is necessary, if it had been adopted months ago we would have avoided the increases ”. It would be appropriate to know on which elements Mattarella came to this conviction.

It is true that the price cap is Mario Draghi's sack flour; but it does not seem appropriate to make it a question of national identity. Also because not everyone, not only abroad, but also in Italy are not convinced of the effectiveness of this decision. He writes about it in a lepidus libellus, '' The blackmail of Russian gas '', recently published by Il Sole-24 ore, an expert in the sector of the caliber of Alberto Clò, former minister of the first Prodi government. According to Clò, the proposal to set a price cap (cap on prices) for international gas prices (a proposal never explained by its proponents, starting with the Italian government, demonstrates that both the European Commission and the governments navigate on sight without a clear vision According to the author, this would essentially be the request for a discount, which would highlight a fact: the applicants would not be able to reduce their demand to levels compatible with this price (which they would like to have discounted) We should not forget that the solemn No to paying for supplies in rubles lasted just one morning.

Clò then criticizes the idea of ​​replacing everything with wind and solar technologies, which, being totally controlled by China, would make us move from one dependency to another. It is necessary to be convinced that the war has radically changed political priorities, moving from climate to those of '' economic convenience '' and '' energy security '' which sees the return to the scene of coal and the prospect of nuclear power. '' That the war is favoring the energy transition – comments Clò – is in conclusion yet another non-truth that alas has always polluted the narrative. Europe and Italy have sought these troubles. What happened was – according to Clò – largely predictable. If Europe had not timidly turned away from Putin's aggression, things could have taken a different course. The main need now is to get rid of Russian gas. Because there is no sovereignty – affirms Clò – there is no possibility of peace if one is hostage in the supply of energy from countries that use them as a weapon of political blackmail. This is what happened to the whole of Europe in making Putin 's Russia the largest supplier of energy for political reasons even before economic ones. In this regard, the West's ability to defeat OPEC after the oil crises of the 1970s is comforting. Today we can focus on a wide range of technologies on which any sort of veto is not acceptable. The environment – Clò continues – must remain a priority but cannot be an obstacle until the goal is achieved. Because in the long run you have to get there alive.