In an interview with pv magazineLinda Kalcher, executive director of European think tank Strategic Perspectives, described the potential impact of the recent EU elections on the continent’s energy landscape. “Investors and businesses need certainty and predictability to thrive,” she says. “If cleantech is not produced here, jobs and investments will go to the US and China and deindustrialization will threaten. This cannot be in the interests of any politician.”
pv magazine spoke to Linda Kalcher, Executive Director of Strategic Perspectives, to understand the implications of the European elections for the PV sector. According to Kalcher, the results of the European elections are such that the Green Deal must be confirmed, but that priority must be given to its industrial dimension, especially in the field of communication. According to the director of the Belgian think tank, some countries risk not understanding international trends and remaining exposed to the volatility of fossil fuel prices, at a time when competition for research, production and sales of green technologies is stronger than ever.
In your reportyou underlined that the European elections will above all change the perspective of climate action policy, promoting a transition from climate to industry and energy security. But at a time when renewable energy offers competitive prices, this may primarily mean a change in marketing and political messaging, while maintaining substantial coherence with previous policies and measures. Is this correct?
Linda Kalcher: True, the center parties are expected to shift focus to industrial competitiveness and energy security, given the challenges the EU faces. Renewable energy can be an essential solution, making electricity prices cheaper for households and businesses and helping to reduce Europe’s dependence on fossil fuel imports. The Green Deal is seen as essential for European competitiveness, energy security and prosperity, making a complete rollback unlikely.
You wrote that, if the European People’s Party (EVP) want a comfortable and reliable majority for industrial competitiveness and economic security, the Greens are the best choice. How likely is that, from your perspective? What is the most likely alternative to this coalition?
The centre-right EPP, social democratic S&D and liberal Renew groups are now starting to negotiate a kind of coalition agreement in the European Parliament with priorities for the next five years. A European industrial strategy that strengthens Europe’s industrial base, creates good jobs and global market leadership is in the interests of all three parties.
However, to have a comfortable majority to get the next Commission President approved in Parliament, around 450 MPs will be needed. The Greens can bridge that gap and align on issues such as industrial competitiveness, energy security and investment.
An alternative coalition involving far-right parties is less likely as they do not have enough seats and some delegations in the ECR (such as the Polish Law and Justice) are not acceptable to the EPP.
You wrote: “A social dimension of the transition and how to make climate-friendly equipment more affordable will also be a key challenge for this term, as far-right parties have won votes thanks to the cost of living crisis. With the second carbon market (ETS) for buildings and mobility set to be implemented in 2027, attention must turn to how transition solutions can be better distributed.” What are the long-term implications for R&D in renewable energy technologies in Europe? How can the EU avoid challenging the global net-zero industrial race led by China and the US? For example, how likely is it that ETS money will increasingly be used to support technological developments in Europe?
Addressing the social dimension of the transition is crucial, especially as far-right parties have gained support by focusing on the cost of living. Ensuring that climate-friendly equipment is affordable will help. Good financial schemes for citizens are crucial to bring down energy prices and help households renovate, purchase clean technology and use their own renewable energy.
The next five years are crucial for the EU to step up its competition with China and the US in cleantech. Investments, R&D and innovation in the field of renewable energy sources, electrolyzers and storage are important assets in this race. In addition, they can reduce energy prices for households and businesses.
With all carbon market revenues required to go to climate-related projects, national governments can increasingly use ETS funds to support technological advances to remain competitive with China and the US.
Some EU countries are lowering their climate targets. Does this mean that more European countries will continue to rely on imported gas and therefore be exposed to a likely increase in fossil fuel price volatility? What could be the consequences for future elections? For example, could it give more political space to the groups that will not be part of the coalition?
Rolling back climate policies is an economic and security risk. Investments in the production of batteries, electric vehicles, renewable energy sources and electrolyzers can create jobs and prosperity. Investors and businesses need certainty and predictability to thrive. If clean technology is not produced here, jobs and investments will go to the US and China and deindustrialization will threaten. This cannot be in the interest of any politician.
How do you see or expect Italian energy and climate policy to change in the coming years? Do you see any risk in the reduced focus on solar energy, as shown for example by the government’s decision to approve the DL Agricoltura?
Italy has a choice: does it want to play a role in the global race for clean technology with a modern, competitive carbon-free industry or does it want to become a gas hub in times of declining demand? The economy, investments and global demand are shifting towards cleantech. Italy is in danger of missing out on this trend.
Italian businesses and farmers could benefit from abundant, affordable energy to stay competitive. Balancing economic and security objectives will be crucial to the government’s strategy.
What is the risk of a two-speed Europe?
A two-speed Europe will emerge if governments cannot invest in the transition due to budget constraints. The result would be uneven progress and economic imbalances within the EU, undermining collective efforts to reach net zero targets. This remains a significant risk, especially when recovery funding expires in 2027. Italy, as the largest beneficiary of the funds, could be significantly affected.
When will we know more about the consequences of the European elections for European energy ambitions and objectives?
Three processes will determine the priorities for the next five years. The negotiations in the European Parliament on the coalition’s priorities, the “strategic agenda” that the heads of state will adopt in the European Council at the end of this month and the work program of the European Commission that will be adopted at the end of this year. The new coalition in Parliament is likely to focus on making the transition to a net-zero economy economically viable and socially fair, reducing energy dependence, promoting green jobs and ensuring competitiveness.
This content is copyrighted and may not be reused. If you would like to collaborate with us and reuse some of our content, please contact: editors@pv-magazine.com.
