At New York Climate Week in September, opinion leaders voiced concern that high-profile events often gloss over the deep inequalities exposed by climate change, especially how poorer populations suffer disproportionately and struggle to access mitigation or adaptation resources. The message was clear: climate policies should better reflect social justice concerns, ensuring they are inclusive and do not unintentionally favor those already privileged.  We believe access to food sits at the heart of this call for inclusion, because everything starts with food: it is a fundamental human right and a foundation for health, education and opportunity. It is also a lever for climate, economic and social resilience.  > We believe access to food sits at the heart of this call for inclusion, > because everything starts with food This makes the global conversation around food systems transformation more urgent than ever. Food systems are under unprecedented strain. Without urgent, coordinated action, billions of people face heightened risks of malnutrition, displacement and social unrest.   Delivering systemic transformation requires coordinated cross-sector action, not fragmented solutions. Food systems are deeply interconnected, and isolated interventions cannot solve systemic problems. The Food and Agriculture Organization’s recent Transforming Food and Agriculture Through a Systems Approach report calls for systems thinking and collaboration across the value chain to address overlapping food, health and environmental challenges.   Now, with COP30 on the horizon, unified and equitable solutions are needed to benefit entire value chains and communities. This is where a systems approach becomes essential.  A systems approach to transforming food and agriculture  Food systems transformation must serve both people and planet. We must ensure everyone has access to safe, nutritious food while protecting human rights and supporting a just transition.   At Tetra Pak, we support food and beverage companies throughout the journey of food production, from processing raw ingredients like milk and fruit to packaging and distribution. This end-to-end perspective gives us a unique view into the interconnected challenges within the food system, and how an integrated approach can help manufacturers reduce food loss and waste, improve energy and water efficiency, and deliver food where it is needed most.   Meaningful reductions to emissions require expanding the use of renewable and carbon-free energy sources. As outlined in our Food Systems 2040 whitepaper,1 the integration of low-carbon fuels like biofuels and green hydrogen, alongside electrification supported by advanced energy storage technologies, will be critical to driving the transition in factories, farms and food production and processing facilities.   Digitalization also plays a key role. Through advanced automation and data-driven insights, solutions like Tetra Pak® PlantMaster enable food and beverage companies to run fully automated plants with a single point of control for their production, helping them improve operational efficiency, minimize production downtime and reduce their environmental footprint.  The “hidden middle”: A critical gap in food systems policy  Today, much of the focus on transforming food systems is placed on farming and on promoting healthy diets. Both are important, but they risk overlooking the many and varied processes that get food from the farmer to the end consumer. In 2015 Dr Thomas Reardon coined the term the “hidden middle” to describe this midstream segment of global agricultural value chains.2   This hidden middle includes processing, logistics, storage, packaging and handling, and it is pivotal. It accounts for approximately 22 percent of food-based emissions and between 40-60 percent of the total costs and value added in food systems.3 Yet despite its huge economic value, it receives only 2.5 to 4 percent of climate finance.4  Policymakers need to recognize the full journey from farm to fork as a lynchpin priority. Strategic enablers such as packaging that protects perishable food and extends shelf life, along with climate-resilient processing technologies, can maximize yield and minimize loss and waste across the value chain. In addition, they demonstrate how sustainability and competitiveness can go hand in hand.  Alongside this, climate and development finance must be redirected to increase investment in the hidden middle, with a particular focus on small and medium-sized enterprises, which make up most of the sector.   Collaboration in action  Investment is just the start. Change depends on collaboration between stakeholders across the value chain: farmers, food manufacturers, brands, retailers, governments, financiers and civil society.  In practice, a systems approach means joining up actors and incentives at every stage.5 The dairy sector provides a perfect example of the possibilities of connecting. We work with our customers and with development partners to establish dairy hubs in countries around the world. These hubs connect smallholder farmers with local processors, providing chilling infrastructure, veterinary support, training and reliable routes to market.6 This helps drive higher milk quality, more stable incomes and safer nutrition for local communities.  Our strategic partnership with UNIDO* is a powerful example of this collaboration in action. Together, we are scaling Dairy Hub projects in Kenya, building on the success of earlier initiatives with our customer Githunguri Dairy. UNIDO plays a key role in securing donor funding and aligning public-private efforts to expand local dairy production and improve livelihoods. This model demonstrates how collaborations can unlock changes in food systems.  COP30 and beyond  Strategic investment can strengthen local supply chains, extend social protections and open economic opportunity, particularly in vulnerable regions. Lasting progress will require a systems approach, with policymakers helping to mitigate transition costs and backing sustainable business models that build resilience across global food systems for generations to come.   As COP30 approaches, we urge policymakers to consider food systems as part of all decision-making, to prevent unintended trade-offs between climate and nutrition goals. We also recommend that COP30 negotiators ensure the Global Goal on Adaptation include priorities indicators that enable countries to collect, monitor and report data on the adoption of climate-resilient technologies and practices by food processors. This would reinforce the importance of the hidden middle and help unlock targeted adaptation finance across the food value chain.  When every actor plays their part, from policymakers to producers, and from farmers to financiers, the whole system moves forward. Only then can food systems be truly equitable, resilient and sustainable, protecting what matters most: food, people and the planet.  * UNIDO (United Nations Industrial Development Organization)  Disclaimer POLITICAL ADVERTISEMENT * The sponsor is Tetra Pak * The ultimate controlling entity is Brands2Life Ltd * The advertisement is linked to policy advocacy regarding food systems and climate policy More information here. https://www.politico.eu/7449678-2

It’s been a decade since the U.S. and Europe pushed the world to embrace a historic agreement to stop the planet’s runaway warming. The deal among nearly 200 nations offered a potential “turning point for the world,” then-U.S. President Barack Obama said. Eventually, almost every country on Earth signed the 2015 Paris Agreement, a pact whose success would rest on peer pressure, rising ambition and the economics of a clean energy revolution. But 10 years later, the actions needed to fulfill those hopes are falling short. The United States has quit the deal — twice. President Donald Trump is throttling green energy projects at home and finding allies to help him undermine climate initiatives abroad, while inking trade deals that commit countries to buying more U.S. fossil fuels. Europe remains on track to meet its climate commitments, but its resolve is wavering, as price-weary voters and the rise of far-right parties raise doubts about how quickly the bloc can deliver its pledge to turn away from fossil fuels. Paris has helped ingrain climate change awareness in popular culture and policy, led countries and companies to pledge to cut their carbon pollution to zero and helped steer a wave of investments into clean energy. Scientists say it appears to have lessened the odds of the most catastrophic levels of warming. On the downside, oil and gas production hasn’t yet peaked, and climate pollution and temperatures are still rising — with the latter just tenths of a degree from the tipping point agreed in Paris. But the costs of green energy have fallen so much that, in most parts of the world, it’s the cheapest form of power and is being installed at rates unthinkable 10 years ago. World leaders and diplomats who are in Brazil starting this week for the United Nations’ annual climate talks will face a test to stand up for Paris in the face of Trump’s opposition while highlighting that its goal are both necessary and beneficial. The summit in the Amazonian port city of Belém was supposed to be the place where rich and poor countries would celebrate their progress and commit themselves to ever-sharper cuts in greenhouse gas pollution. Instead, U.S. contempt for global climate efforts and a muddled message from Europe are adding headwinds to a moment that is far more turbulent than the one in which the Paris Agreement was adopted. Some climate veterans are still optimists — to a point. “I think that the basic architecture is resistant to Trump’s destruction,” said John Podesta, chair of the board of the liberal Center for American Progress, who coordinated climate policy under Obama and former President Joe Biden. But that resistance could wilt if the U.S. stays outside the agreement, depriving the climate movement of American leadership and support, he said. “If all that’s gone, and it’s gone for a long time, I don’t know whether the structure holds together,” Podesta added. Other climate diplomats say the cooperative spirit of 2015 would be hard to recreate now, which is why acting on Paris is so essential. “If we had to renegotiate Paris today, we’d never get the agreement that we had 10 years ago,” said Rachel Kyte, the United Kingdom’s special climate representative. “But we can also look to these extraordinary data points, which show that the direction of travel is very clear,” she said, referring to growth of clean energy. “And most people who protect where their money is going to be are interested in that direction of travel.” THE PARIS PARADOX One thing that hasn’t faded is the business case for clean energy. If anything, the economic drivers behind the investments that Paris helped unleash have surpassed even what the Paris deal’s authors anticipated. But the political will to keep countries driving forward has stalled in some places as the United States — the world’s largest economy, sole military superpower and historically biggest climate polluter — attacks its very foundation. Trump’s attempts to undermine the agreement, summed up by the 2017 White House slogan “Pittsburgh, not Paris,” has affected European ambitions as well, French climate diplomat Laurence Tubiana told reporters late last month. “I have never seen such aggressivity against national climate policy all over because of the U.S.,” said Tubiana, a key architect of the Paris Agreement. “So we are really confronted with an ideological battle, a cultural battle, where climate is in that package the U.S. government wants to defeat.” The White House said Trump is focused on developing U.S. oil and engaging with world leaders on energy issues, rather than what it dubs the “green new scam.” The U.S. will not send high-level representatives to COP30. “The Green New Scam would have killed America if President Trump had not been elected to implement his commonsense energy agenda,” said Taylor Rogers, a spokesperson. “President Trump will not jeopardize our country’s economic and national security to pursue vague climate goals that are killing other countries.” Trump is not the only challenge facing Paris, of course. Even under Obama, the U.S. insisted that the Paris climate pollution targets had to be nonbinding, avoiding the need for a Senate ratification vote that would most likely fail. But unlike previous climate pacts that the U.S. had declined to join, all countries — including, most notably, China — would have to submit a pollution-cutting plan. The accord left it up to the governments themselves to carry out their own pledges and to push laggards to do better. An unusual confluence of political winds helped drive the bargaining. Obama, who was staking part of his legacy on getting a global climate agreement, had spent the year leading up to Paris negotiating a separate deal with China in which both countries committed to cutting their world-leading pollution. France, the host of the Paris talks, was also determined to strike a worldwide pact. In the year that followed, more than 160 countries submitted their initial plans to tackle climate change domestically and began working to finish the rules that would undergird the agreement. “The Paris Agreement isn’t a machine that churns out ambition. It basically reflects back to us the level of ambition that we have agreed to … and suggests what else is needed to get back on track,” said Kaveh Guilanpour, vice president for international strategies at the Center for Climate and Energy Solutions and a negotiator for the United Kingdom during the Paris talks. “Whether countries do that or not, it’s essentially then a matter for them.” Catherine McKenna, Canada’s former environment minister and a lead negotiator of the Paris Agreement’s carbon crediting mechanism, called the deal an “incredible feat” — but not a self-executing one. “The problem is now it’s really up to countries as well as cities, regions, companies and financial institutions to act,” she said. “It’s not a treaty thing anymore — it’s now, ‘Do the work.’” WHEN GREEN TURNS GRAY Signs of discord are not hard to find around the globe. China is tightening its grip on clean energy manufacturing and exports, ensuring more countries have access to low-cost renewables, but creating tensions in places that also want to benefit from jobs and revenue from making those goods and fear depending too much on one country. Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney, a former United Nations climate envoy, eliminated his country’s consumer carbon tax and is planning to tap more natural gas to toughen economic defenses against the United States. The European Union spent the past five years developing a vast web of green regulations and sectoral measures, and the bloc estimates that it’s roughly on track to meet those goals. But many of the EU’s 27 governments — under pressure from the rising far right, high energy prices, the decline of traditional industry and Russia’s war against Ukraine — are now demanding that the EU reevaluate many of those policies. Still, views within the bloc diverge sharply, with some pushing for small tweaks and others for rolling back large swaths of legislation. “Europe must remain a continent of consistency,” French President Emmanuel Macron said after a meeting of EU leaders in October. “It must step up on competitiveness, but it must not give up on its [climate] goals.” Poland’s Prime Minister Donald Tusk, in contrast, said after the same meeting that he felt vindicated about his country’s long-standing opposition to the EU’s green agenda: “In most European capitals, people today think differently about these exaggerated European climate ambitions.” Worldwide, most countries have not submitted their latest carbon-cutting plans to the United Nations. While the plans that governments have announced mostly expand on their previous ones, they still make only modest reductions against what is needed to limit Earth’s warming since the preindustrial era to 1.5 degrees Celsius. Exceeding that threshold, scientists say, would lead to more lives lost and physical and economic damage that would be ever harder to recover from with each tenth of a degree of additional warming. The U.N.’s latest report showing the gap between countries’ new pledges and the Paris targets found that the world is on track for between 2.3 and 2.5 degrees of warming, a marginal difference from plans submitted in 2020 that is largely canceled out when the U.S. pledge is omitted. Policies in place now are pointing toward 2.8 degrees of warming. “We need unprecedented cuts to greenhouse gas emissions now in an ever-compressing timeframe and amid a challenging geopolitical context,” said Inger Andersen, executive director of the U.N. Environment Programme. But doing so also makes sense, she added. “This where the market is showing that these kind of investments in smart, clean and green is actually driving jobs and opportunities. This is where the future lies.” U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres said in a video message Tuesday that overshooting the 1.5-degrees target of Paris was now inevitable in the coming years imploring leaders to rapidly roll out renewables and stop expanding oil, gas and coal to ensure that overshoot was short-lived. “We’re in a huge mess,” said Bill Hare, a longtime climate scientist who founded the policy institute Climate Analytics. Greenhouse gas pollution hasn’t fallen, and action has flat lined even as climate-related disasters have increased. “I think what’s upcoming is a major test for the Paris Agreement, probably the major test. Can this agreement move forward under the weight of all of these challenges?” Hare asked. “If it can’t do that, governments are going to be asking about the benefits of it, frankly.” That doesn’t mean all is lost. In 2015, the world was headed for around 4 degrees Celsius of warming, an amount that researchers say would have been devastating for much of the planet. Today, that projection is roughly a degree Celsius lower. “I think a lot of us in Paris were very dubious at the time that we would ever limit warming to 1.5,” said Elliot Diringer, a former climate official who led the Center for Climate and Energy Solutions’ international program during the Paris talks. “The question is whether we are better off by virtue of the Paris Agreement,” he said. “I think the answer is yes. Are we where we need to be? Absolutely not.” GREEN TECHNOLOGY DEFYING EXPECTATIONS In addition, the adoption of clean energy technology has moved even faster than projected — sparking what one climate veteran has called a shift in global climate politics. “We are no longer in a world in which only climate politics has a leading role and a substantial role, but increasingly, climate economics,” said Christiana Figueres, executive secretary of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change in 2015. “Yes, politics is important; no longer as important as it was 10 years ago.” Annual solar deployment globally is 15 times greater than the International Energy Agency predicted in 2015, according to a recent analysis from the Energy and Climate Intelligence Unit, a U.K. nonprofit. Renewables now account for more than 90 percent of new power capacity added globally every year, BloombergNEF reported. China is deploying record amounts of renewables and lowering costs for countries such as Brazil and Pakistan, which has seen solar installations skyrocket. Even in the United States, where Trump repealed many of Biden’s tax breaks and other incentives, BloombergNEF predicts that power companies will continue to deploy green sources, in large part because they’re often the fastest source of new electricity. Costs for wind and batteries and falling, too. Electric vehicle sales are soaring in many countries, thanks in large part to the huge number of inexpensive vehicles being pumped out by China’s BYD, the world’s largest EV-maker. Worldwide clean energy investments are now twice as much as fossil fuels spending, according to the International Energy Agency. “Today, you can actually talk about deploying clean energy technologies just because of their cost competitiveness and ability to lower energy system costs,” said Robbie Orvis, senior director of modeling and analysis at the research institution Energy Innovation. “You don’t actually even have to say ‘climate’ for a lot of them, and that just wasn’t true 10 years ago.” The economic trends of the past decade have been striking, said Todd Stern, the U.S. climate envoy who negotiated the Paris Agreement. “Paris is something that was seen all over the world, seen by other countries, seen in boardrooms, as the first time in more than 20 years when you finally got heads of government saying, ‘Yes, let’s do this,’” he said. “And that’s not the only reason why there was tremendous technological development, but it sure didn’t hurt.” Still, limits exist to how far businesses can take the clean energy transition on their own. “You need government intervention of some kind, whether that’s a stick or a carrot, to push the economy towards a low-carbon trajectory,” said Andrew Wilson, deputy secretary general of policy at the International Chamber of Commerce. “If governments press the brakes on climate action or seriously start to soft pedal, then it does have a limiting effect.” Brazil, the host of COP30, says it wants to demonstrate that multilateralism still works and is relevant to peoples’ lives and capable of addressing the climate impacts communities around the world are facing. But the goal of this year’s talks might be even more straightforward, said Guilanpour, the former negotiator. “If we come out of COP30 demonstrating that the Paris Agreement is alive and functioning,” he said, “I think in the current context, that is pretty newsworthy of itself.” Nicolas Camut in Paris, Zi-Ann Lum in Ottawa, Karl Mathiesen in London and Zia Weise in Brussels contributed to this report.

Disclaimer: POLITICAL ADVERTISEMENT * The sponsor is Polish Electricity Association (PKEE) * The advertisement is linked to policy advocacy on energy transition, electricity market design, and industrial competitiveness in the EU. More information here The European Union is entering a decisive decade for its energy transformation. With the international race for clean technologies accelerating, geopolitical tensions reshaping markets and competition from other major global economies intensifying, how the EU approaches the transition will determine its economic future. If managed strategically, the EU can drive competitiveness, growth and resilience. If mismanaged, Europe risks losing its industrial base, jobs and global influence.  > If managed strategically, the EU can drive competitiveness, growth and > resilience. If mismanaged, Europe risks losing its industrial base, jobs and > global influence. This message resonated strongly during PKEE Energy Day 2025, held in Brussels on October 14, which brought together more than 350 European policymakers, industry leaders and experts under the theme “Secure, competitive and clean: is Europe delivering on its energy promise?”. One conclusion was clear: the energy transition must serve the economy, not the other way around.  Laurent Louis Photography for PKEE The power sector: the backbone of Europe’s industrial future  The future of European competitiveness will be shaped by its power sector. Without a successful transformation of electricity generation and distribution, other sectors — from steel and chemicals to mobility and digital — will fail to decarbonize. This point was emphasized by Konrad Wojnarowski, Poland’s deputy minister of energy, who described electricity as “vital to development and competitiveness.”  “Transforming Poland’s energy sector is a major technological and financial challenge — but we are on the right track,” he said. “Success depends on maintaining the right pace of change and providing strong support for innovation.” Wojnarowski also underlined that only close cooperation between governments, industry and academia can create the conditions for a secure, competitive and sustainable energy future.  Flexibility: the strategic enabler  The shift to a renewables-based system requires more than capacity additions — it demands a fundamental redesign of how electricity is produced, managed and consumed. Dariusz Marzec, president of the Polish Electricity Association (PKEE) and CEO of PGE Polska Grupa Energetyczna, called flexibility “the Holy Grail of the power sector.”  Speaking at the event, Marzec also stated “It’s not about generating electricity continuously, regardless of demand. It’s about generating it when it’s needed and making the price attractive. Our mission, as part of the European economy, is to strengthen competitiveness and ensure energy security for all consumers – not just to pursue climate goals for their own sake. Without a responsible approach to the transition, many industries could relocate outside Europe.”  The message is clear: the clean energy shift must balance environmental ambition with economic reality. Europe cannot afford to treat decarbonization as an isolated goal — it must integrate it into a broader industrial strategy.  > The message is clear: the clean energy shift must balance environmental > ambition with economic reality. The next decade will define success  While Europe’s climate neutrality target for 2050 remains a cornerstone of EU policy, the next five to ten years will determine whether the continent remains globally competitive. Grzegorz Lot, CEO of TAURON Polska Energia and vice-president of PKEE, warned that technology is advancing too quickly for policymakers to rely solely on long-term milestones.  “Technology is evolving too fast to think of the transition only in terms of 2050. Our strategy is to act now — over the next year, five years, or decade,” Lot said. He pointed to the expected sharp decline in coal consumption over the next three years and called for immediate investment in proven technologies, particularly onshore wind.  Lot also raised concerns about structural barriers. “Today, around 30 percent of the price of electricity is made up of taxes. If we want affordable energy and a competitive economy, this must change,” he argued.  Consumers and regulation: the overlooked pillars  A successful energy transition cannot rely solely on investment and infrastructure. It also depends on regulatory stability and consumer participation. “Maintaining competitiveness requires not only investment in green technologies but also a stable regulatory environment and active consumer engagement,” Lot said.  He highlighted the potential of dynamic tariffs, which incentivize demand-side flexibility. “Customers who adjust their consumption to market conditions can pay below the regulated price level. If we want cheap energy, we must learn to follow nature — consuming and storing electricity when the sun shines or the wind blows.”  Strategic investments for resilience  The energy transition is more than a climate necessity. It is a strategic requirement for Europe’s security and economic autonomy. Marek Lelątko, vice-president of Enea, stressed that customer- and market-oriented investment is essential. “We are investing in renewables, modern gas-fired units and energy storage because they allow us to ensure supply stability, affordable prices and greater energy security,” he said.  Grzegorz Kinelski, CEO of Enea and vice-president of PKEE, added: “We must stay on the fast track we are already on. Investments in renewables, storage and CCGT [combined cycle gas turbine] units will not only enhance energy security but also support economic growth and help keep energy prices affordable for Polish consumers.”  The power sector must now be recognized as a strategic enabler of Europe’s industrial future — on par with semiconductors, critical raw materials and defense. As Dariusz Marzec puts it: “The energy transition is not a choice — it is a necessity. But its success will determine more than whether we meet climate targets. It will decide whether Europe remains competitive, prosperous and economically independent in a rapidly changing world.”  > The power sector must now be recognized as a strategic enabler of Europe’s > industrial future — on par with semiconductors, critical raw materials and > defense. Measurable progress, but more is needed  Progress is visible. The power sector accounts for around 30 percent of EU emissions but has already delivered 75 percent of all Emissions Trading System reductions. By 2025, 72 percent of Europe’s electricity will come from low-carbon sources, while fossil fuels will fall to a historic low of 28 percent. And in Poland, in June, renewable energy generation overtook coal for the first time in history.  Still, ambition alone is not enough. In his closing remarks, Marcin Laskowski, vice-president of PKEE and executive vice-president for regulatory affairs at PGE Polska Grupa Energetyczna, stressed the link between the power sector and Europe’s broader economic transformation. “The EU’s economic transformation will only succeed if the energy transition succeeds — safely, sustainably and with attractive investment conditions,” he said. “It is the power sector that must deliver solutions to decarbonize industries such as steel, chemicals and food production.”  A collective European project  The event in Brussels — with the participation of many high-level speakers, including Mechthild Wörsdörfer, deputy director general of DG ENER; Tsvetelina Penkova, member of the European Parliament and vice-chair of the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy; Thomas Pellerin-Carlin, member of the European Parliament; Catherine MacGregor; CEO of ENGIE and vice-president of Eurelectric; and Claude Turmes, former minister of energy of Luxembourg — highlighted a common understanding: the energy transition is not an isolated environmental policy, it is a strategic industrial project. Its success will depend on coordinated action across EU institutions, national governments and industry, as well as predictable regulation and financing.  Europe’s ability to remain competitive, resilient and prosperous will hinge on whether its power sector is treated not as a cost to be managed, but as a foundation to be strengthened. The next decade is a window of opportunity — and the choices made today will shape Europe’s economic landscape for decades to come. 

VILVOORDE, Belgium — Hidden behind two giant cooling towers in a mothballed gas power plant, a sea of rectangular boxes holds the key to solving one of the EU’s most vexing challenges: Energy is being squandered.   The containers, each weighing 26 tons and stretching as far as the eye can see, are packed with lithium batteries. Together they will soon make up the largest battery storage park in Europe.  The EU desperately needs the project. The bloc is building renewable energy at a record pace, but it can’t always use the power that wind and solar plants create. Sometimes the demand isn’t there, so the energy is simply lost as electricity can’t always be stored.  It’s a big problem. In 2023 the EU essentially wasted the equivalent of 0.5 percent of its total power consumption, according to Eurelectric, the bloc’s leading electricity industry association. That’s making it harder to solve another urgent problem: the high energy prices hampering manufacturers. Energy storage technologies can ease price spikes and help renewables operators avoid curbing production at times of oversupply, an increasingly common problem in Europe.  Sites like Vilvoorde “can really respond to some of today’s [changing] energy demands, which will only increase throughout the energy transition,” said Wim Alen, deputy vice president for battery storage at Engie, the utility that is developing the project. For firms, he added, “it will translate to cheaper bills.” The stakes are existential for Europe’s energy-hungry companies, which are facing power prices that are double those of their U.S. rivals. Those prices will only rise further this year, according to the EU’s own internal assessment. On Wednesday the EU will unveil its grand plan to marry economic revival and green policy. That will include promises to promote energy storage developers, a plan that “contributes to lower prices for all consumers,” according to a draft POLITICO obtained. It’s a start, industry figures and experts say, but much more will be needed.  What the EU needs above all, said Jacopo Tosoni, head of policy at the European Association for Storage of Energy lobby, is “a clear strategy.” FINDING A BALANCE Last year the EU sourced 47 percent of its electricity from green energy; Brussels has pushed hard to build out renewables and hit its climate goals.  But that success also presents a raft of problems.  In 2023 the EU essentially wasted the equivalent of 0.5 percent of its total power consumption, according to Eurelectric. | Gints Ivuskans/Getty Images Unpredictable solar and wind production causes volatility in power markets, creating uncertainty for buyers. At times of oversupply, power prices can even go negative, harming revenues. Last year, EU power prices fell below zero 1,480 times, according to the Eurelectric lobby.  Too much green energy can also prompt grid operators to order renewable plants to curb their production to help balance supply and demand. That’s when power gets wasted. “Investments are slowing down,” said Walburga Hemetsberger, CEO of the SolarPower Europe lobby, flagging that new solar panel growth across the EU slid by 92 percent last year.  “This is just the start of a trend which we do not want to see because this is putting the energy transition at stake,” she said. According to Sepehr Soltani, an energy analyst at the Rystad consultancy, that slowdown is “the main reason why energy storage is important,” since it can store up and dispatch electricity efficiently back into the grid at times of low supply. Europe does have some energy storage sites, Soltani said, two-thirds of which are so-called pumped storage. That works by having hydroelectric turbines push water up to reservoirs at times of oversupply, which is then released and turned back into power when demand is high.  Roughly a third are battery parks like the one in Vilvoorde, which can briefly store electricity until grid operators request it. But it’s a subpar setup. Pumped storage only works in specific areas, and batteries typically only store power for several hours. Newer technologies may help sequester energy for longer periods. Dutch-Irish company Corre Energy, for example, is currently building projects in Denmark and the Netherlands that compress air in old salt mines, which it then transforms back into electricity.  The caverns can store energy for up to “three-and-a-half days,” said Corre Energy CEO Patrick McClughan, which gives grid operators more flexibility than the “three to four hours” they get from batteries.  STORAGE SUPPORT But rolling out energy storage at the scale needed will require more EU help, advocates say. Today, Europe has around 85 gigawatts of energy storage systems in place, said Tosoni, the industry lobbyist. The bloc would need more than twice that just to reach the EU’s legally binding 2030 target for 42.5 percent of total energy production to come from renewables. Too much green energy can also prompt grid operators to order renewable plants to curb their production to help balance supply and demand. | Jc Milhet and Hans Lucas/Getty Images As things stand now, “we’re gonna definitely fall short” of that target by up to a quarter, he said, arguing that Brussels needs to step up its support of the fledgling sector. So far, the European Commission, the EU’s executive, has given capitals until 2027 to set storage goals and other targets to better handle fluctuating supply and demand. It will then compile those into a bloc-wide 2030 target.  The Commission will also propose new rules allowing EU governments to subsidize storage schemes as part of its plans to jumpstart the bloc’s competitiveness, according to early drafts. “We will help scale up subsidies for non-fossil flexibility technologies, such as storage,” a Commission spokesperson told POLITICO, adding that the EU executive would also “adopt new rules” to “address the remaining barriers that prevent storage from valuing their services in the [EU’s] electricity market.” But Brussels still needs a broader energy storage vision, Tosoni argued, with an earlier EU-wide target that gives the industry “investment certainty.”  The Commission, Tosoni added, should also scrap tax rules that charge battery operators twice — once for storing energy, and again for sending it back to the grid. Tosoni had a few other requests, including quicker permitting and revised national regulations to better address the emerging energy storage sector.  It’s also about fostering new technologies. Dutch startup Aquabattery, for example, is working on a battery that stores energy by splitting saltwater into an acid and alkaline solution, which can theoretically store energy for an unlimited amount of time. But for storage technology to gain broad traction, the EU must harmonize storage regulations across different countries, said Janneke Gi-Stuijfzand, the firm’s chief commercial officer. “Some sort of support scheme” to help them scale up “could help” too, she said. Back in Vilvoorde, Engie’s Alen agrees more needs to be done — fast.  “Governments must take care to put in place the right rules to allow the development of such types of energy storage,” he said, against a backdrop of empty spots where new battery containers will soon be slotted into place with large cranes. If they don’t, he warns, it will lead to “high costs, not only for … industry but also for consumers down the line.”

On Dec. 9th, the Polish Electricity Association (PKEE) organized the PKEE Energy Day 2024 event in Brussels, which brought together energy sector leaders, EU officials and policymakers to discuss Europe’s energy transformation. With energy security, the transition and economic competitiveness as central themes, the event highlighted Poland’s upcoming presidency of the Council of the European Union and its role in addressing energy challenges during a pivotal time for Europe. Poland’s presidency comes amid the ongoing war in Ukraine, ambitious EU climate targets, and the need to secure affordable energy. Polish officials outlined priorities focusing on energy security, industrial competitiveness, and advancing the EU’s clean and just energy transition. Dariusz Marzec, president of PKEE and CEO of PGE, emphasized the moment’s significance — stating that the energy transformation is not only about achieving climate goals, but also ensuring a competitive economy and benefits for citizens. Marzec highlighted investments in offshore wind farms, grid modernization and energy storage as critical pillars for strengthening energy security in Poland. > Polish officials outlined priorities focusing on energy security, industrial > competitiveness, and advancing the EU’s clean and just energy transition. Poland’s energy policy legacy So far, and despite its decarbonization challenges, Poland has proactively shaped EU energy policy. Notably, Prime Minister Donald Tusk proposed the “Energy Union” in 2014 to strengthen energy security, reduce reliance on Russian energy and promote joint gas purchases. These ideas influenced the 2022 REPowerEU Plan. Poland also contributed to establishing financial mechanisms supporting the energy transition, such as the EU’s Modernization Fund and the Just Transition Fund, aiding coal-dependent regions. Collaboration with the European Commission has helped fund key energy infrastructure, including interconnectors across Central and Eastern Europe (CEE). Currently, Poland is advancing offshore wind projects, positioning itself as a regional leader alongside Baltic states. These initiatives integrate supply chains, foster innovation, and promote cooperation. via PKEE Ensuring energy security during crisis During PKEE Energy Day 2024, Paulina Hennig-Kloska, Poland’s minister of climate and environment, stressed that Poland’s presidency will prioritize energy security while pursuing climate objectives. She emphasized investments in renewable energy, energy storage technologies and grid modernization. A top priority for Poland’s presidency will be delivering the REPowerEU goal to phase out the EU’s reliance on Russian fossil fuels. It would be worthwhile for this phase out to be permanent and integrated into the EU’s climate and energy security policies. Lessons learned from Russia’s war in Ukraine must drive long-term resilience and independence in Europe’s energy systems. Ditte Juul Jorgensen, director-general for energy at the European Commission, underscored the importance of collaboration: “The Polish presidency will play a key role in safeguarding energy security while ensuring a fair transition for all EU member states.” Nicola Pochettino from the European Investment Bank stressed the need to reduce energy costs while supporting climate goals, indicating that a just transition must benefit all citizens and regions. A competitive industrial strategy Europe’s energy sector plays a vital role in decarbonizing industry, promoting electrification and ensuring competitive energy prices. However, challenges remain. High energy costs continue to hinder European businesses, with electricity prices in 2023 still 80% higher than in the US and 55% higher than in China. These disparities threaten the EU’s industrial competitiveness. Poland’s presidency aims to strengthen European industry’s competitiveness, supported by proposals like the Clean Industrial Deal, which seeks to lower energy costs and support clean energy. Marzena Czarnecka, Poland’s minister of industry, stressed the importance of competitiveness on Poland’s agenda. Jakub Jaworowski, minister of state assets, echoed this, noting that the energy transition must deliver low-cost, clean energy and competitive prices for the industry. > High energy costs continue to hinder European businesses, with electricity > prices in 2023 still 80% higher than in the US and 55% higher than in China. Industry leaders emphasized the need for clear regulations and financial mechanisms to drive investments. Walburga Hemetsberger, CEO of SolarPower Europe, called for grid modernization to accommodate renewables, while Giles Dickson, CEO of WindEurope, advocated for supporting European wind energy manufacturing to compete globally. Addressing structural challenges Energy experts highlighted the need to address systemic challenges in Europe’s energy system. Fatih Birol, executive director of the International Energy Agency, pointed to historical missteps, such as reliance on Russian gas, the retreat from nuclear power and underinvestment in solar PV manufacturing. Birol expressed optimism, stating that the EU must focus on retaining its industrial base and preparing for growth powered by clean technologies. Modernizing Europe’s energy grids is critical to prevent them from hindering economic growth. Roman Szyszko, vice-president of the management board of ENERGA SA and member of the management board of PKEE, emphasized that grid investments, which could reach €425 billion by 2030, are essential to accelerate the transition. Energy storage: A pillar of resilience At the same time, energy storage technologies are key to stabilizing grids as renewable energy expands. Grzegorz Onichimowski, president of PSE, highlighted the need for large-scale storage solutions beyond small prosumer batteries, citing power-to-heat technologies and gas-fired plants as additional supports for grid stability. Grzegorz Lot, CEO of TAURON and vice-president of the management board of PKEE, underscored the importance of energy storage, sharing plans for a 700 MW pumped-storage plant and stressing the need for clear legislative frameworks to attract investments. Bruce Douglas, president of the Global Renewables Alliance, emphasized long-term storage solutions, while Guillermo Antonio Rios Pavia of Aurora Energy Research highlighted how battery storage can enhance flexibility. via PKEE A just transition focused on citizens Participants agreed that the energy transition must prioritize affordability and inclusivity. Grzegorz Kinelski, CEO of ENEA and vice-president of the management board of PKEE, noted the importance of a diverse energy mix combining renewables and gas alongside energy storage. Mechanisms such as capacity markets and contracts for difference are essential to ensure a smooth and just transition. Building a unified energy vision Poland’s contributions, including the Energy Union and the Just Transition Fund, demonstrate how national initiatives can become EU-wide successes. By fostering cooperation and advocating for shared benefits, Poland aims to advance Europe’s energy goals during its presidency. As Europe faces significant energy challenges, the CEE region’s role will be vital in building a competitive and resilient region. Finalizing the REPowerEU goal, modernizing infrastructure and strengthening industrial competitiveness will be central to Poland’s efforts. Through collaboration with EU institutions and member states, Poland seeks to secure affordable energy, drive innovation and deliver on climate objectives, ensuring Europe’s energy future remains sustainable and competitive.

BAKU, Azerbaijan — It was the most trumpeted achievement of last year’s climate conference. One year later, it’s nowhere to be found. The call to “transition away” from coal, oil and gas that came out of December’s COP28 summit in Dubai was historic — the first time 200 countries, including major oil and gas producers such as Saudi Arabia and the United States, had explicitly agreed on the need to wind down fossil fuels. But in Baku, Azerbaijan, COP29 is taking place after a U.S. election that handed the presidency back to Donald Trump, who has vowed to massively expand oil and gas production. And the host country’s president, Ilham Aliyev, used his keynote address to call fossil fuel resources a “gift of the God.” Against that backdrop, even getting this summit to reiterate last year’s nonbinding agreement has faced “pushback,” Lars Aagaard, Denmark’s climate minister, told reporters on Thursday. And some advocates for strong climate action appeared to be accepting defeat. Money is still the most contentious issue at the Azerbaijan summit: Less than 24 hours before talks were scheduled to conclude on Friday, negotiators were still battling behind closed doors about how many hundreds of billions of dollars in climate aid for poorer nations should come from wealthy governments such as the U.S. and the European Union. But the question of how to handle the 2023 fossil fuel pledge is a symbol of how far global climate politics have shifted. A group of 22 Arab countries has refused to accept any mention of the fossil fuel language, according to three European negotiators, who were granted anonymity because they were not authorized to speak on the record. During a public meeting on Thursday, Saudi Arabian negotiator Albara Tawfiq, speaking on behalf of the Arab group, said any reference to fossil fuels would be “unacceptable.” “The Arab group will not accept any text that targets any specific sectors, including fossil fuels, and no proposal on economic policies in developing countries even on an encouragement basis,” he said. Ugandan Energy Minister Ruth Nankabirwa told POLITICO the country wanted the freedom to exploit its own energy resources: “Any statement which would be towards phasing out completely of fossil fuel, that Uganda does not support. It is not just. It is not just.” Failing to repeat the fossil fuel language from COP28 would be disappointing, said Colombia’s minister of environment and sustainable development, Susana Muhamad. “What is the point of having an agreement and a convention if we cannot deal with the issue that creates the problem?” she asked. An early draft of the final deal for the COP29 talks, released early Thursday, contained no mention of fossil fuels and no commitment to the broader Dubai agreement. G20 leaders who met this week in Rio de Janeiro said they “welcome and fully subscribe” to last year’s agreement, but declined to repeat its contents. At a press conference on Thursday in Baku, Aagaard would say only that the fossil fuels pledge was “close” to a red line for Denmark. “Everybody’s going to go away somewhat unhappy tomorrow,” said Ireland’s climate minister, Eamon Ryan. “There’s going to be red lines crossed.” And while rich countries and those nations vulnerable to climate change insist that the talks must also send a clear signal on cutting greenhouse gas pollution, Ryan suggested that the talks on delivering a new finance goal should not collapse over it. Failure to get a deal “would be unforgivable, would be historically shameful,” he said. “And we can’t do that, we have to reach compromise.” The European Union has insisted that the final agreement in Baku needs a strong component on cutting emissions, describing any backtracking as a “red line.” But senior European negotiators appeared open to not repeating the fossil fuel language this week. “What we would like to avoid — that’s a red line — is watering down the agreed text,” said Attila Steiner, co-leader of the EU’s COP29 team, in an interview on Wednesday. The EU could “live with” just restating last year’s language, he added. When asked whether there needs to be an explicit reference to fossil fuels again, Steiner said: “What we agreed in Dubai … it’s a package. The exact wording is a different question.” Instead, Europeans appeared keen to focus their attention on a deal that describes how countries will move away from fossil fuels. In a statement to reporters Wednesday, German climate envoy Jen Morgan said COP29 needs to speed up the implementation of the energy goals agreed in Dubai, but did not mention the fossil fuel transition call when enumerating what that means. “Concretely, we are looking for a decision on the need to cooperate on the expansion of electricity grids and energy storage, as well as the promotion of green skills, the tackling of all fossil fuel subsidies [and] agreeing no new coal,” she said.

The results of the presidential election were still being tallied on Wednesday when the announcement came: One of China’s largest solar manufacturers was selling a massive new factory in Texas. Trina Solar was in line to receive nearly $1.8 billion in tax credits under President Joe Biden’s climate law, as one of several Chinese solar businesses setting up factories in the United States to benefit from the incentives in the Inflation Reduction Act. But President-elect Donald Trump has vowed to dismember Biden’s climate agenda, and has called for taking a hard line against economic competition from China. Trina said Trump’s victory had “nothing to do” with the sale of the factory near Dallas to the Georgia-based battery manufacturer Freyr. “Rather, it is based on the company’s long-term growth in the country,” a spokesperson said in a statement. But analysts said the news illustrated the impact of Trump’s victory on energy markets. With Republicans on track to control both chambers of Congress come January, the focus on Capitol Hill has turned to the future of the IRA. At the forefront of those discussions is the fate of generous tax breaks for companies that make solar panel parts and other clean energy components in the United States. Lawmakers of both parties have already filed a handful of bills that could bar Chinese-linked companies from receiving tax credits under the IRA. Those talks will intensify after Republicans’ victories last week, industry analysts and lobbyists said. Republicans have also expressed broader unhappiness with Biden’s handling of Chinese-made solar gear, including a two-year pause in imposing tougher trade barriers against equipment that comes to the U.S. via Southeast Asia. “Democrats made a mistake when they failed to prohibit China from being eligible for the IRA tax credits, and the Biden administration’s solar tariff moratorium was a disastrous policy that allowed China to overproduce and flood the market in an effort to harm U.S. solar manufacturers and undermine the IRA,” said Nick Iacovella, a former aide to Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) and a senior vice president at the Coalition for a Prosperous America, a trade group representing U.S. manufacturers. “That’s not going to happen under Trump.” Trina’s sale caught industry observers and local officials by surprise. The mayor of Wilmer, Texas, where the 1.35-million-square-foot factory was recently completed, said she had not heard the news when a reporter contacted her on Friday. “That is the first I’ve heard of it,” said Sheila Petta. “I speak to Trina all the time, and I’ve not spoken to them about this.” The acquisition was initially announced Wednesday morning by Freyr, a small battery manufacturer that shifted operations from Europe to the United States late last year in part to take advantage of the IRA tax credits. The company, which also has operations in Norway, plans to build a battery factory in Georgia. Trina confirmed the deal in a release on Friday. It’s expected to be finalized this year. Under the terms of the deal, Trina could eventually acquire an approximately 20 percent stake in the battery-maker, appoint representatives to its board and market panels under Trina’s name. Freyr would own and operate the factory, which would be able to produce enough panels annually to power 500,000 homes. The factory began production on Nov. 1, according to statements by Trina and Freyr. It would also mark Freyr’s first entry into solar manufacturing. Trina “will continue to serve the U.S. market with industry-leading smart PV and energy storage solutions, technology and manufacturing expertise,” the company said in a statement. Freyr CEO Dan Barcelo underscored to POLITICO that the company would own 100 percent of Trina’s solar manufacturing assets and said conversations first began with Trina earlier in the year. He said Freyr would control and own any of the tax benefits. “This transaction is not really about politics. It’s about economics,” Barcelo said. “We really believe in solar and batteries longer term and we saw an opportunity to invest in this very strong asset.” While the IRA contains provisions preventing Chinese automakers from benefiting from the law, it contains no such prohibitions for Chinese solar manufacturers, which dominate the global market for panels. Trina was one of eight major solar-makers with links to China moving forward with new factories in the U.S., according to a review by POLITICO. The Chinese-built factories have prompted intense debate within the solar industry. Some see factories such as Trina’s as a step forward in America’s transition to cleaner energy sources, saying they will create U.S. jobs, drive down the cost of solar installations and ultimately lead to deeper emission reductions. They said that even as the U.S. is trying to build out its supply chain, it is in the early stages and most of the technological expertise now sits in Asia. But others argue that the trend leaves the U.S. overly reliant on China, which continues to dominate the market for critical subcomponents. They contend the new facilities stifle attempts to foster a domestic solar manufacturing industry. Barcelo said the transaction allows an American company to receive the law’s tax benefits, while also allowing for public investment. “Prior to this, no one could invest in it,” he said. “It was a private asset by a U.S. subsidiary of a Chinese-owned company. Now it’s a publicly traded company that investors have access to, and I think that’s a great thing.” Barcelo also acknowledged that changes to the U.S. clean energy manufacturing landscape could come under Trump, but affirmed the company’s commitment. “We looked at all that, and in the current environment, we still think reshoring and bringing manufacturing to the U.S., U.S. jobs … that’s all good,” he said. “It’s good for U.S. energy security [and] it’s good for U.S. national security.” When Republicans take power next year, they will look for ways to pay for some of the trillions of dollars in tax cuts Trump is proposing, with a fraction of those offsets possibly coming from repealing or changing parts of the IRA, industry lobbyists and analysts said. But provisions in the law that benefit manufacturing are popular with some Republicans, Iacovella said. Companies have announced plans to build or expand an estimated 555 manufacturing facilities that could benefit from the IRA, totaling at least $153.4 billion in planned investments and promising to create roughly 160,000 jobs, POLITICO reported last week. A majority of those investments are heading to GOP districts, and nearly 100,000 of the jobs could come online during Trump’s upcoming term. “There is no appetite to repeal the tax credits that have led to the job creation, investment and manufacturing capacity from the IRA,” Iacovella said. The feeling does not extend to Chinese companies, however. Many analysts expect that Republicans will move to bar Chinese companies from receiving credits under 45X, one of the key manufacturing provisions under the law that has spurred the wave of project announcements. “It seems like there is a good chance that something to this effect will eventually be passed,” said Elissa Pierce, a solar analyst at the consulting firm Wood Mackenzie. “I have spoken with some Chinese manufacturers who have floated the idea of partnering with a U.S. company as a strategy to avoid being blocked from getting the 45X tax credits for their U.S. factories, so this could be Trina’s motivation for the sale.” Trina has been at the center of a larger trade battle that has divided the solar industry. U.S., European and South Korean-based panel manufacturers have accused Chinese companies of flooding the market with cheap panels and called for higher tariffs on Chinese-made imports. In 2023, the Commerce Department accused Trina of circumventing American tariffs on Chinese solar imports by shipping goods to Southeast Asia for minor processing before they’re sent to the U.S. Those calls have drawn protests from some American solar developers, which rely on Chinese panel suppliers and worry that tariffs could drive up the cost of new solar installations. Trump’s victory adds a new wrinkle to that debate. The once and future president has pledged to raise tariffs by 20 percent on all imports and impose an additional 60 percent levy on Chinese shipments. Trina’s sale appears designed to avoid potential U.S. restrictions on Chinese companies benefiting from the IRA, Iacovella said. “The Chinese are, and have been for a long time, very adept at reading the tea leaves and navigating U.S. policy,” he said. “I think they saw Trump got elected and they saw the writing on the wall very clearly.”