By Luke Haywood, Head of Climate and Energy at the European Environmental Bureau (EEB), a EUSEW partner organisation
Luke Haywood, European Environmental Bureau – sursa foto: EUSEW 2025
For a long time, the shift to renewable energy was seen as a virtuous but arduous task – good for the climate but not necessarily good for our wallets. This has changed at breathtaking speed. Costs have reduced across the whole renewable and electricity value chain: from cheap electricity production thanks to solar and battery storage to affordable electric vehicles.
Renewable energy has the potential to significantly decrease energy costs and thereby help address two of the most pressing issues in European politics: the cost of living and competitiveness. By lowering energy costs, renewables can reduce the cost of all goods and services produced in Europe. This also benefits companies producing here, many of which have been struggling with the rapid and sustained increase in gas prices since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.
Yet Europe seems hesitant. EU countries appear torn between following China in its rapid embrace of renewables and electrification or the United States’ model of doubling down on fossil fuels.
Unlike the US, a major exporter of oil and gas, the EU is heavily dependent on fossil fuel imports – even more than China. Economics and geopolitics make rapid renewables expansion a no-brainer.
So, what is holding Europe back?
Fossil-fuel dependent industries
While the EU does not have fossil fuel production, it has powerful industries that are built on access to cheap fossil fuels. Automotive, chemicals, and steel industries are still clinging to yesterday’s technologies. None of these sectors face an unsurmountable task in electrifying their production processes and products – the technologies are there. But as the delay of the ban on new cars with internal combustion engines illustrates, some companies believe they can remain competitive by sticking to short-term profits and old tech.
Nuclear distraction
Nuclear power is suddenly back in the spotlight, with proponents pushing to treat it as equal to renewables in Europe’s climate strategy. But the data tells a very different story.
Nuclear is a declining industry, largely because renewables have become cheaper and faster to deploy. By contrast, new nuclear plants are slow and increasingly expensive to build. Analysis of over 16,000 large projects shows that nuclear rivals only Olympic Games in terms of delays and cost overruns. Renewables, meanwhile, deliver on budget and on time, and without producing waste that remains toxic for thousands of generations.
Some argue that nuclear is needed for “baseload” power (energy that’s always on). But ever-cheaper ways to store and flexibly manage electricity are making this argument more irrelevant every year. Trying to combine nuclear with renewables also creates problems: both have high fixed costs and low variable costs, meaning curtailing one to make room for the other is expensive – and in the case of nuclear, it can even raise maintenance costs.
Transition bottlenecks
Europe’s energy transition has hit a congestion problem. Wind and solar projects are ready, but getting permission to build them and connect to the grid is taking too long. The technology is not the issue, and neither is the regulation. The new Renewable Energy Directive is meant to make permitting faster and simpler. What is needed now is for authorities to have the people, tools, and resources to put those rules into practice, so projects do not get stuck on paper.
Grid congestion adds another layer of complexity. Smart planning is essential to ensure renewable and storage projects connect quickly and ease pressure on the system. To speed things up, countries should prioritise projects that are ready to build and can help reduce grid bottlenecks and costs.
Insufficient local engagement
Buy-in from local communities is critical. For decades, fossil fuel industries understood this well. Coal, despite its enormous health and environmental damage, often secured lasting local support. Not only through relatively high wages, but by embedding themselves in communities: funding sports clubs, sponsoring local events, supporting public services, and creating a sense of shared identity and pride.
Renewables must learn from this. Transparent decision-making and meaningful participation are essential. But so is sharing the financial upside. Local communities should see tangible benefits from hosting renewable projects: local investment, ownership opportunities, and profits that stay in the region. The Citizens Energy Package offers a great opportunity to act decisively on this.
If these four barriers are overcome, Europe can finally reap the full benefits of renewables: cheaper energy for citizens, lower production costs for industry, and stronger 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 is produced in co-operation with the European Sustainable Energy Week (EUSEW) – the biggest annual event dedicated to renewables and efficient energy use in Europe. #EUSEW2026 marks the 20th edition and will once again bring together the community of people who care about building a secure and clean energy future for the next generations.
Check the currently open calls to join. This opinion was published by NewsEnergy as a media partner of EUSEW 2026.
READ ALSO:
European offshore wind power for a competitive EU steel industry and vice versa
Shared power, shared security: Nordic lessons for Europe’s energy resilience
