by Eusebiu Stamate, environmental engineer and public policy analyst
The Energy Transition Is No Longer Technical, but Political and Diplomatic
The energy transition is no longer just a technical process. It has become a political, economic, and diplomatic challenge in which Romania needs to define its role and priorities more clearly. In recent months, discussions such as the Clean Industrial Deal and the European Grids Package have demonstrated how energy policy is now closely intertwined with questions of diplomacy and national interest.
The real issue is not how many strategies exist or how large the European funds are, but whether we can negotiate effectively for our own interests and follow a coherent direction. Romania’s approach to nuclear development, grid modernisation, and climate adaptation will depend on technical execution, as well as on how these topics are represented diplomatically and communicated to the public.
Technical Diplomacy and Nuclear Energy
The energy transition requires an integrated approach. Nuclear energy, modern electricity grids, and climate adaptation policies are connected elements that must work together. For that to happen, Romania needs both funding and expertise, combined with active and credible diplomacy. This diplomacy should be practical and focused on results, capable of promoting Romania’s interests in international consortia, in Brussels, and in discussions with strategic partners.
Nuclear energy remains a sensitive topic, yet an essential one. Many people still associate it with past accidents or see it as outdated and risky. Safety concerns persist despite technological progress and today’s strict control standards. Although implementation costs are high, the long-term benefits are significant. Nuclear power remains a realistic option for building a stable and decarbonised energy mix.
A clear example of how technology and diplomacy intersect is the SMR project at Doicești, supported by partners from the United States and Japan. It is both a long-term investment and a test of diplomatic maturity. The real question is whether we can manage cooperation of this scale and provide the legislative predictability and political commitment expected by partners who invest not only financial resources but also reputation.
Energy Diplomacy in the Context of the Grids Package
On the infrastructure side, the Grids Package brings opportunities, but also conditionalities. Grid modernisation can be seen as an obligation under new European funding frameworks but also an urgency confirmed by recent events.
Risks become tangible when undersized networks fail under increased demand or lack of flexibility. Energy companies have been saying for years that urgent investment in infrastructure is needed, especially to integrate renewable sources. The lack of such investment is increasingly cited as a national security vulnerability.
We all saw what happened in Spain a few months ago, when blackouts completely halted activity in some regions. Traffic lights stopped working, shops lost refrigeration, and urban transport was paralysed. Initially, renewable energy, especially photovoltaics, was blamed for these disruptions, but subsequent reports and discussions showed that the problems were caused by weaknesses in the connection system, not by the energy source. Energy can no longer be treated simply as an economic sector, it is a matter of maintaining the functioning of modern society.
It is also not enough to call for new interconnections and transmission lines; we must know how to negotiate our place in these regional plans. We need representatives who understand the technical side but can also articulate a coherent national position in a complex European context. Technical diplomacy is essential if Romania is to assert its interests in European energy planning. These challenges relating to infrastructure and regional positioning are about administrative capacity, but even more about how Romania uses its diplomatic resources to influence relevant European processes.
Climate Change and Public Perception
Climate adaptation is often overlooked in the public sphere, even though the extreme heatwaves of recent years have prompted even many former sceptics to question their views and acknowledge its importance. A national strategy on the topic exists, but its implementation is slow. This gap between documents and practice undermines public trust and reduces the effectiveness of actual measures.
In fact, we have strategies upon strategies, filled with figures and visions, yet those figures change from year to year. There is even a strategy for combating desertification, but who truly takes it seriously? Hundreds of pages of images and text, without clear measures or a credible implementation timeline, cannot bring real change.
The recent controversy over halting the National Anti-Hail System shows how easily adaptation policies can be derailed by populist narratives and disinformation. Instead of debating the effectiveness of atmospheric intervention technologies, an artificial conflict was created between “simple farmers” and the “corrupt system.” Religious symbolism and radical opposition replaced technical arguments.
More seriously, this type of discourse was amplified by a lack of institutional communication, fuelling ideas about “controlled weather” or “agricultural sabotage.” Instead of confidence in real adaptation solutions, the public was exposed to pseudoscience and polarisation. This pattern could become dangerous for other areas of climate transition. When measures are perceived as top-down impositions, without consultation or clear explanations, they risk being blocked precisely when they are most needed.
Renewable Energy and Populist Discourse
The same populist logic is also present in the legislative arena. This type of rhetoric was evident in legislative proposals submitted at the end of the summer parliamentary session. One example is the wave of anti-European and anti-technology populism that has grown in public discourse. Some MPs claimed that photovoltaic energy is not a viable solution because “the sun doesn’t shine at night.” The statement was made in the Romanian Parliament over a year ago by an AUR deputy, amusing at the time, but ignored. Unfortunately, this very lack of response allowed the populist current to capitalise on it over time.
Seemingly absurd or trivial messages become effective tools in anti-European rhetoric, especially when they go unanswered. In addition, at the end of the summer session, legislative initiatives were recorded that continued this sovereigntist line, with a declarative focus and minimal legislative impact. Among them was a proposal on prosumers and self-consumption of energy, which included priority grid access, a ban on self-consumption taxes, and the creation of a national registry, but without clearly defined mechanisms, ANRE involvement, or a coherent implementation framework. Another initiative proposed taxing large companies and high-net-worth individuals, using strong redistributive rhetoric but without impact studies, implementation procedures, or alignment with European legislation.
Both projects were submitted by unaffiliated MPs or members of self-proclaimed sovereigntist groups, with a populist discourse built around themes such as energy independence, fiscal fairness, and the rhetoric of national sovereignty. Although their chances of adoption are low, using the legislative process for political positioning, without technical rigour, undermines trust in regulation and increases polarisation in the public sphere.
The topic of renewable energy, including photovoltaics, must be taken seriously in the public space, not only in technical or administrative circles. Such statements must be countered immediately, with clear scientific data and solutions, precisely to prevent the spread of misconceptions that undermine public support for the energy transition. The extremist sovereigntist wave does not disappear if ignored. Populist statements, whether amusing or absurd, must be dismantled in the public sphere with facts, not just mocked and forgotten. In the case of renewable energy, the answer is simple and proven: storage. This is not a technological gimmick, but the key to the stability and functioning of any modern energy system. Without batteries and adequate storage capacity, we are talking about vulnerability, not transition.
Diplomacy, Coordination, Credibility
If Romania wants to play a meaningful role in the European energy transition, it must treat this topic as more than a set of strategic documents. What matters is how we connect domestic policy with European processes and how consistent our representation is across all levels of decision-making. Romania needs to secure funding, partnerships, and coordination coherently and continuously.
To achieve that, we need active participation in European environmental and energy files, not only in plenary debates but also in working groups, technical negotiations, and policy drafting. This is where influence is built, and where Romania must be present with clear positions and competent voices.
The energy transition is ultimately a test of political coherence, administrative capacity, and strategic vision. For Romania to be a trusted partner in Europe, its diplomacy must be professional, consistent, and grounded in real energy and climate challenges, not slogans.
About the Author
Eusebiu Stamate is an environmental engineer and public policy analyst with experience in European institutions, research organizations, and legislative monitoring. He currently works within a Romanian policy intelligence platform, where he analyzes energy and environmental legislation relevant to both national and EU-level stakeholders. His background combines applied research, public communication, and technical evaluation of environmental and energy policies. This article was written in a personal capacity and reflects independent views.
READ ALSO:
Reclaiming energy sovereignty: the EU’s strategic response to a fragmented global order
