Five EU States Challenge Brussels on Future Power Grid Strategy

Key Moments

Regional Coalition Resists Centralized Grid Blueprint

Five EU member states are pushing back against the European Commission’s vision for a more centrally directed electricity grid strategy, warning that such an approach could slow the green transition and drive up costs.

In a joint document, Bulgaria, Finland, France, Poland and Sweden argue that the European Union risks making its energy transition “slower, more expensive and less secure” if Brussels takes a commanding role in planning the continent’s grid infrastructure. The group instead advocates for a model built on coordinated regional planning rather than a fully centralized energy framework.

“An exclusive focus on a top-down approach would hinder the (Grids) Package’s objective. We alternatively suggest that the regional planning and evaluation approach be strengthened and extended upon,” reads the document.

The clash centers on a legislative proposal the Commission unveiled in December to overhaul how trans-European energy infrastructure is planned. The initiative includes revisions to the EU’s rules on trans-European energy networks and the introduction of a “central scenario” intended to guide long-term investment decisions across member states.

According to the five-country coalition, this model does not reflect how energy networks actually operate. They contend that power systems are highly complex, shaped by regional conditions and political choices, and therefore cannot be effectively designed using a single, Brussels-driven framework.

Top-Down Control vs. Local Expertise

The signatories stress that national transmission system operators and regional authorities possess the technical understanding needed to detect real constraints, security issues and investment needs on the ground. They warn that placing control in the hands of the Commission risks producing projects that look optimal in planning models but fail to deliver economic value when implemented.

“A single scenario wrongly assumes that there is only one way to achieve energy and climate policy objectives,” the document states.

One concern is that large cross-border interconnectors could be approved without matching reinforcements in domestic networks. In such a scenario, the group fears, costly infrastructure could end up underutilized while consumers ultimately shoulder the burden through higher power bills.

The document points to national transmission system operators, such as France’s Réseau de Transport d’Électricité and Sweden’s Svenska kraftnät, as the entities that should remain in charge of technical design. Under their proposal, the Commission would serve primarily as a coordinator, not as the central director of grid planning.

Sweden Targets Congestion Revenue Rules and New Cables

Sweden has become one of the most vocal critics of the Commission’s power grid proposal. Stockholm recently decided to suspend work on a planned new power cable to Denmark in reaction to the Commission’s idea of using revenues from electricity congestion charges to modernize the EU’s grid system.

“The EU should not receive Swedes’ electricity money. At the moment, Brussels is not listening to us. That’s why we are pausing plans for new cables for power exports,” Swedish energy minister Ebba Busch said on 11 May.

The EU Agency for the Cooperation of Energy Regulators describes congestion revenues as surplus income generated when power lines operate at full capacity, which can then be channeled back into network improvements or lower tariffs for consumers.

Busch said the draft legislation under negotiation still places tighter limits on how member states may deploy congestion revenues than the existing legal framework. She added that the Swedish government is also reviewing whether to proceed with additional interconnectors to Finland.

Core Dispute: Who Decides on Strategic Energy Investments?

The proposed Grids Package, which outlines €1.2 trillion of investment in power infrastructure by 2040, has become a broader contest over institutional authority in the EU. The five states argue that the Commission is moving from coordination to political control over long-term energy planning.

A particularly contentious element is the possibility that the Commission could promote projects outside national planning processes. For the signatories, this crosses a line, as they insist that member states must preserve their decision-making power over energy policy, including choices on energy mix and priority infrastructure.

They underline this in the document: “The division of responsibilities must be clear: member states must retain political decision-making powers, European Network of Transmission System Operators (ENTSOs) and Transmission System Operators (TSOs) must provide their technical expertise and knowledge of the energy grids and the Commission must ensure coordination and dialogue with the Trans-European Transport Network (TEN) groups.”

At the same time, the five countries do not reject EU-level cooperation. The document confirms they support cross-border collaboration and acknowledge that interconnected grids are essential for decarbonization and energy security.

Key Actors and Positions

Parliament and Council Seek Compromise

Within the European Parliament, the legislative file is being steered by MEP Tsvetelina Penkova (S&D/Bulgaria), who is broadly aligned with a stronger role for EU-level planning, while still aiming to preserve national input and transparency.

“The rapporteur supports the Commission’s move towards a stronger Union-level planning architecture based on a central scenario, infrastructure-needs identification and a more harmonised cost-benefit analysis,” states Penkova’s draft report dated 24 April.

On the Council side, the EU Cyprus Presidency, which is responsible for brokering agreement among the 27 governments, has already incorporated “many changes to the text to reflect their concerns and needs,” a spokesperson told Euronews.

“We are now moving toward a balanced compromise, and importantly, we are close to reaching an agreement,” the spokesperson of the Cyprus Presidency added, stressing “how critical the file” is.

Timing of Political Agreement Remains Uncertain

Commission President Ursula von der Leyen has recently called on the Council and Parliament to accelerate negotiations and finalize a political agreement on the Grids Package before the summer.

However, internal divisions persist, with some member states seeking financing for interconnections and others, as net contributors, wary of redistribution effects. Due to these political tensions, the legislative file is now more likely to be carried over to the upcoming EU Irish Presidency, which is due to assume the rotating role on 1 July.