Luke Heywood, Head of Climate and Energy at EUSEW’s partner organization the European Environment Agency (EEB), talks about the factors holding back Europe from becoming a renewable energy powerhouse.
For a long time, the transition to renewable energy has been seen as a beneficial but difficult task, good for the climate but not necessarily good for our wallets. This has changed with astonishing speed. Costs have been reduced across the renewable energy and power value chain, from cheap solar and battery power generation to affordable electric vehicles.
Renewable energy has the potential to significantly reduce energy costs, thereby helping to solve two of the most pressing problems in European politics: cost of living and competitiveness. By reducing energy costs, renewable energy can reduce the cost of all goods and services produced in Europe. This also benefits companies producing here, many of which have suffered from rapid and sustained gas price increases since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.
But Europe seems hesitant. EU countries appear to be torn between following China’s rapid push into renewable energy and electrification, or the US model of doubling down on fossil fuels. Unlike the United States, which is a major exporter of oil and gas, the EU relies heavily on fossil fuel imports, even more than China. Economics and geopolitics make it natural for renewable energy to expand rapidly.
So what is holding Europe back?
Industries dependent on fossil fuels
Although the EU does not produce fossil fuels, it has a strong industry based on access to cheap fossil fuels. The automotive, chemical and steel industries are still clinging to yesterday’s technology. None of these areas face insurmountable challenges in electrifying production processes and products; the technology exists. But as the delayed ban on new cars with internal combustion engines shows, some companies believe they can remain competitive by making short-term profits and sticking to old technology.
nuclear distraction
Nuclear power is suddenly back in the spotlight, with advocates pushing for it to be treated on par with renewable energy in Europe’s climate change strategy. But the data tells a completely different story.
Nuclear power is a declining industry, largely because renewable energy has become cheaper and faster to deploy. In contrast, building new nuclear power plants takes longer and costs more and more to build. An analysis of more than 16,000 large-scale projects shows that nuclear power rivals the Olympics only in terms of delays and cost overruns. Renewable energy, on the other hand, delivers results on budget and on time without producing waste that remains toxic for thousands of generations.
Some argue that nuclear power is necessary for “baseload” power (energy that is always on). But with ever-increasingly cheap ways to store and flexibly manage electricity, this argument is becoming less relevant each year. Problems also arise when trying to combine nuclear and renewable energy. Both have high fixed costs and low variable costs, so cutting one to make room for the other is expensive. In addition, maintenance costs can also increase with nuclear power.
Migration bottleneck
Europe’s energy transition faces a congestion problem. Wind and solar projects are ready, but it takes too long to get permits to build them and connect them to the power grid. Neither technology nor regulation is the issue. The new Renewable Energy Directive aims to make permitting faster and easier. What is needed now is to ensure that authorities have the people, tools and resources to put these rules into practice, so that the project does not descend into mere theory.
Grid congestion adds further complexity. Smart planning is essential to quickly connect renewable energy and storage projects and reduce strain on the system. To accelerate things, countries need to prioritize projects that are ready for construction and that will help reduce grid bottlenecks and costs.
Insufficient local involvement
Buy-in from the local community is important. For decades, the fossil fuel industry has understood this well. Coal often secured enduring local support, despite the enormous health and environmental damage it caused. They work not only for relatively high wages, but also by integrating into their communities, funding sports clubs, sponsoring local events, supporting public services, and creating a sense of common identity and pride.
Renewable energy must learn from this. Transparent decision-making and meaningful participation are essential. But so is sharing economic interests. Local communities should reap tangible benefits from hosting renewable projects, such as local investment, ownership opportunities, and local benefits. The Citizen Energy Package provides a great opportunity to act decisively on this.
If Europe can overcome these four barriers, it will ultimately be able to reap the full benefits of renewable energy: cheaper energy for its citizens, lower production costs for industry, and greater energy independence. The technology is ready, the economics make sense, and the geopolitical urgency is undeniable. It’s time for politics to catch up.
This opinion editorial was produced in collaboration with European Sustainable Energy Week (EUSEW), the largest annual event dedicated to renewable energy and efficient energy use in Europe. #EUSW2026 is in its 20th year, once again bringing together a community of people interested in building a safe and clean energy future for generations to come.
Check out current calls and join.
Source link
