On 29 April 2026, the European Commission opened an infringement procedure against France regarding the Biomethane Production Certificates scheme (INFR(2026)4002). The charge: the CPB restricts market access to producers located in metropolitan France, in breach of free movement of goods rules (Articles 34-36 TFEU). France has two months to respond.
This is not an isolated case. In March 2026, the Commission had already blocked the Irish multiplier that made domestic biomethane more competitive under the Renewable Heat Obligation. In 2024, it forced the Netherlands to revise its green gas blending obligation, whose initial version reserved compliance units for domestic production only. Three countries, three different mechanisms, same procedure.
Why this procedure does not undermine the logic of the CPB
The CPB is not a commercial traceability instrument. It is a national production volume obligation, funded by French residential and tertiary consumers, designed to decarbonise gas consumption in France and develop the sector without drawing on public finances. Opening it to imports would hollow out the mechanism: suppliers would purchase CPBs produced elsewhere, with no effect on installed capacity in France.
The Commission proposes as an alternative to “account for biomethane where it is consumed rather than produced.” This is exactly what Guarantees of Origin do: a voluntary instrument that creates no obligation on suppliers and no systemic market signal for the sector. It is not a substitute for the CPB; it is a different object entirely.
The infringement procedure is at its earliest stage. The French administration has very likely anticipated this challenge and holds substantive arguments. The Irish and Dutch precedents show that the Commission challenges these mechanisms but does not eliminate them: it requires the country to provide adequate evidence of necessity, or imposes a revision if it cannot.
What this means for a project or investment
In the short term, the CPB signal remains valid. The registry is operational, CPB contracts are being signed, and brownfield CHP plants are getting upgraded and moving forward. The 0.95 coefficient window for conversions completed before 31 December 2029 (decree of 26 December 2025) is not affected by this procedure.
In the medium term, the question is one of framework stability. Any revision of the scheme, if imposed by the Commission, would take time and require a regulatory amendment. It would have no retroactive effect on existing contracts. But it could weigh on the visibility of the CPB market signal beyond 2029, at the point where mandatory volumes are expected to accelerate significantly under the DGEC trajectory.
The real issue: Europe does not yet have a coherent doctrine on biomethane
The Commission has set a target of 35 bcm of biomethane by 2030. In 2024, EU-27 production stood at 5.2 bcm. Blocking the national mechanisms that make domestic sectors viable is not a strategy for reaching that target.
Each country has designed its mechanism based on its own reality: available feedstock, gas network infrastructure, agricultural base, investment capacity. France currently exploits around 9% of its estimated biomethane potential of 161 TWh, or approximately 13% when including biogas used in cogeneration, according to Sia Partners. Ireland produces 0.075 TWh against an official target of 5.7 TWh by 2030. The Netherlands must reach 21 TWh on an estimated potential of 26 TWh, which genuinely requires imports. These three situations do not call for the same regulatory treatment.
Removing domestic production support mechanisms without offering a credible systemic alternative weakens national sectors without bringing Europe closer to its own objectives. What is missing is not an internal market doctrine applied mechanically, but a coordinated European framework that recognises national potentials, organises complementarities between producing and importing countries, and sets the conditions under which a national obligation mechanism can coexist with free movement rules. That harmonisation work remains largely ahead.
What LBG is monitoring
France’s response to the Commission over the next two months. The DGEC’s position on a potential revision of the CPB’s geographic scope. CPB price movements on the EEX in a context of heightened regulatory uncertainty. And, more structurally, European discussions on a potential harmonised framework for biomethane obligations, which will condition the bankability of CPB projects beyond 2029.
Sources: European Commission, INFR(2026)4002, 29 April 2026; DGEC, CPB trajectory 2026-2035, consultation May 2026; EBA Statistical Report 2025; Sia Partners, 8th European Biomethane Benchmark, November 2025; Gas Networks Ireland, Biomethane Energy Report 2023; Decree of 26 December 2025; Article D.446-10-1 of the French Energy Code.
For the full analysis including a detailed comparison of the French, Irish and Dutch frameworks, see ch4.bio [lien]
