Policy Overview

In the wake of volatile energy prices in 2022, the European Commission proposed a reform of the Electricity Market Design (EMD), seeking to make electricity bills less dependent on short-term fossil fuels prices, boost deployment of renewables and fully utilise alternatives to gas, such as storage and demand response. A public consultation was launched to gather stakeholder views in January 2023.

Policy passed

Despite intense engagement from the fossil fuel and utilities sectors that two-way contracts for difference (CfDs) should remain voluntary, the finalized proposal mandates CfDs for new public investments in renewable and nuclear energy facilities. However, the proposal also allows continued subsides for fossil-fuel generators of last resort until 2028.

InfluenceMap Query

IPCC aligned transition from carbon-emitting technologies; and renewable energy

Policy Status

Inactive: completed. The file was approved in May 2024 and entered into force in July 2024.

  • European Parliament: Industry, Research and Energy (ITRE) Committee
  • Rapporteur: Nicolás González Casares (Party of European Socialists)
  • European Council: Transport, Telecommunications and Energy Council

Evidence Profile

Key

opposing not supporting mixed/unclear
supporting strongly supporting

European Commission

European Parliament

European Council

Policy Engagement Overview

The aggregated evidence of corporate and industry lobbying on the reform of the EU Electricity Market Design shows predominantly negative engagement from the energy-intensive and oil and gas sectors, with more positive positions stemming from the renewable energy sector.

Long-term Lobbying Trends

Most entities supported power purchase agreements (PPAs) but only pushed for voluntary two-way contracts for difference (CfDs), including associations WindEurope, SolarPower Europe, Hydrogen Europe and companies RWE, Repsol, Enel, Shell, EDF and Iberdrola.

Heavy industry was split on whether two-way CfDs should be mandatory, CEFIC supporting prioritizing the use of PPAs over CfDs. Air Liquide and Eurofer supported the use of mandatory CfDs.

Heavy industry, the energy sector and cross-sector groups seemed to not support prioritizing renewable over fossil energy sources. Eni, Shell, BusinessEurope, CEFIC, FuelsEurope, Eurofer, Eurogas and Eurelectric advocated that any flexibility measures to manage demand in the electricity grid should be technology neutral.

Renewable energy associations supported measures to reduce reliance on fossil fuels for electricity grid flexibility, including SmartEn and SolarPower Europe which opposed allowing member states to provide payments to fossil-fuel generators of last resort until 2028.

Impacts on Policy Ambition

In the absence of an Impact Assessment Report, policy progress is benchmarked against measures set out in the EU Commission's January 2023 Press Release and subsequently released Staff Working Document. In this case, some elements in the EU Commission and Council proposals appear to correlate to positions advocated by industry. - Public Support for PPAs: The EU Commission’s proposed EMD reform mandates EU member states to utilize certain instruments, such as guarantee schemes, to reduce financial risks associated with PPAs. It allowed renewable energy producers participating in a public tender to be able to reserve a share of the energy they generated for sale through a PPA.

  • Two-way Contracts for Difference: The Commission proposed mandatory two-way CfDs for new investments in wind, solar, and nuclear energy. ‘New investments’ included repowering and prolonging the lifetime of existing wind, solar, geothermal, hydropower and nuclear power-generation.

  • Demand response and storage: The proposal mandated that Member States define an indicative target for demand side response and storage and apply mechanisms to ensure an adequate amount of fossil-free electricity capacity is available to meet demand. This is in line with the Commission’s original ambition to utilize alternatives to fossil gas.

  • Consumer compensation: The Commission proposed mandating, in line with its initial ambition to reduce usage of gas-fired power, that electricity system operators offer a mechanism to compensate consumers who response to a call for demand reduction in order to manage electricity demand.

EU Commission Proposal

  • Public Support for PPAs: The EU Commission’s proposed EMD reform mandates EU member states to utilize certain instruments, such as guarantee schemes, to reduce financial risks associated with PPAs. It allowed renewable energy producers participating in a public tender to be able to reserve a share of the energy they generated for sale through a PPA.

  • Two-way Contracts for Difference: The Commission proposed mandatory two-way CfDs for new investments in wind, solar, and nuclear energy. ‘New investments’ included repowering and prolonging the lifetime of existing wind, solar, geothermal, hydropower and nuclear power-generation.

  • Demand response and storage: The proposal mandated that Member States define an indicative target for demand side response and storage and apply mechanisms to ensure an adequate amount of fossil-free electricity capacity is available to meet demand. This is in line with the Commission’s original ambition to utilize alternatives to fossil gas.

  • Consumer compensation: The Commission proposed mandating, in line with its initial ambition to reduce usage of gas-fired power, that electricity system operators offer a mechanism to compensate consumers who response to a call for demand reduction in order to manage electricity demand.

EU Parliament Position

The EU Parliament draft proposal somewhat weakened several elements of the EU Commission’s proposal, but increased the ambition of others.

  • Public Support for PPAs: The EU Parliament proposed that Member States could limit PPAs to electricity generated from new renewable energy projects.

  • Two-way Contracts for Difference: The draft weakened the Commission’s revision by proposing that two-way CfDs or ‘equivalent support schemes’ should be allocated through a ‘voluntary and cost-effective procedure’ to prevent undue distortions in the function of the electricity markets. It also limited the scope of how CfDs can be deployed in existing power-generation.

  • Demand response and storage: The Parliament took a more ambitious position on targets for demand response and storage, proposing that two separate indicative quantifiable national targets for demand response and energy storage should be set by member states, alongside a delivery plan. It also mandated that the Commission draw up a strategy on demand response and energy storage that is consistent with the 2030 Climate Target.

  • Consumer compensation: The draft proposal called for an assessment of the possibility of alternative consumer compensation measures, weakening the revision’s ambition compared to the Commission’s proposal.

EU Council Proposal

The EU Council’s position on the EMD reform weakened several elements of the Commission proposal.

  • Public Support for PPAs: The Council mostly preserved the Commission’s ambition on PPAs and emphasized that member states should seek to remove unjustified barriers for cross-border PPAs.

  • Two-way Contracts for Difference: The Council took a less ambitious approach compared to the Commission, proposing mandatory two-way CfDs for all new wind, solar, and nuclear energy facilities, but leaving Member States to decide whether to provide two-way CfDs for repowering and prolonging the lifetime of existing facilities.

  • Demand response and storage: The position maintained the indicative target for demand side response and storage, however it restricted the application of capacity mechanisms to cases where flexibility needs are not met by the removal of barriers and existing investments.

  • Subsidies for fossil fuel generation: The Council introduced a capacity mechanism under which fossil-based power generation facilities that begun operation before July 2019 would be eligible to receive payments.

  • Consumer compensation: The position restricted the use of the consumer compensation mechanism to times when there is an “electricity price crisis.” The Council proposed to shift the objective from maximizing the integration of renewables into the market towards achieving security of supply.

Policy Adopted

EU policymakers adopted the reform of the EU Electricity Market Design in May 2024. The finalized proposal allows two-way CfDs to be used for new investments or for extending the lifespan of existing power-generation facilities. It also allowed member states to keep subsidizing fossil-fuel generators of last resort until 2028, including coal power plants.

InfluenceMap Query

IPCC aligned transition from carbon-emitting technologies; and renewable energy

Policy Status

Inactive: completed. The file was approved in May 2024 and entered into force in July 2024.

  • European Parliament: Industry, Research and Energy (ITRE) Committee
  • Rapporteur: Nicolás González Casares (Party of European Socialists)
  • European Council: Transport, Telecommunications and Energy Council

Evidence Profile

Key

opposing not supporting mixed/unclear
supporting strongly supporting

European Commission

European Parliament

European Council

Live Lobbying Alerts

Industry publishes recommendations as part of Antwerp Dialogue on Industrial Electrification & Competitiveness

10/01/2025

On 9 December, an industry coalition representing the European chemicals, aluminium, and electricity sectors published a series of policy recommendations to EU policymakers, as an outcome of the Antwerp Dialogue on Industrial Electrification & Competitiveness. The signatories of the joint recommendations, which included the European Cement Association (CEMBUREAU), the European Chemical Industry Council (Cefic) and Eurelectric, expressed broad support for a Clean Industrial Deal to enable the decarbonization of the energy sector. However, several policy recommendations did not appear to be aligned with the EU Commission's original policy ambition. For example, entities advocated against reducing indirect cost compensation as part of reforms to the EU Emissions Trading System, and did not seem to support prioritizing non-fossil flexibility support schemes in the EU Electricity Market Design reform.

ArcelorMittal unsupportive of EU state aid conditions on green hydrogen use

29/02/2024

In a December 11th meeting with the EU Commissioner Maroš Šefčovič on the clean industry transition, ArcelorMittal did not support EU state aid conditions for the steel industry to use green hydrogen to decarbonize, advocating that the industry should be able to use carbon capture and storage (CCS) or fossil gas in the short-term. The company also advocated to weaken the EU Emissions Trading System and EU Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism, whilst supporting the Electricity Market Design reform on renewables and a range of policy to scale up demand for low-carbon steel.

E.ON CEO supports agreement of the EU’s electricity market design revision

21/12/2023

In a December 15th LinkedIn post, E.ON’s CEO and the current President of Eurelectric supported the compromise agreement reached by European Parliament members and Member states on the proposed electricity market design reform, stating that “it is for sure much better than any other outcome we could have imagined one year ago”.

Industry associations attempt to weaken EU Electricity Market Design

23/11/2023

Eurogas and Hydrogen Europe released a November 15th joint industry association statement advocating against non-fossil flexibility in favor of a technology neutral market design, which does not appear to support a move away from utilizing natural gas for flexibility.

Eurelectric advocates to weaken the EU Electricity Market reform

23/11/2023

In a press release dated November 15th, Eurelectric advocated that demand-side flexibility options in the EU Electricity Market reform should be market-based and technology neutral, in contrast to the EU Commission's proposal of using demand-side response and storage measures to reduce usage of fossil gas for power system flexibility.

Entities Engaged on Policy

The table below lists the entities found to be most engaged with the policy. The entities are ranked by performance band. InfluenceMap tracks over 500 companies and 250 industry associations globally. Each entity name links to its full InfluenceMap profile, where the evidence of its engagement can be found.

Influencemap Performance BandOrganizationPolicy PositionPolicy Engagement Intensity