Power cuts, wars and climate disasters have exposed the fragility of Europe’s energy systems. Yet Poland —one of the EU’s biggest energy guzzlers— is doubling down on the same old dead ends, leaning towards more gas and nuclear. A better path exists: decentralised renewables, electrification and real energy democracy.
Radek Gawlik (EKO-UNIA) and Grzegorz Popczyk report.
Flights cancelled, lights going out in Spain and Portugal. A nuclear power plant in France forced to shut down by swarms of jellyfish. Another one – thousands of kilometers away – cut off from the grid, which is no laughing matter. The Ukrainian energy infrastructure attacked constantly. Under these circumstances, the inherent vulnerabilities of Europe’s energy systems come to light; the cracks are showing.
At the same time the energy transition out of fossil fuels seems to be adrift. A clear and sound political vision? Often nowhere in sight. Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk once said: “if someone has a vision, he should see a doctor”. Such cynicism only deepens the feeling of confusion, insecurity and, ultimately, helplessness.
A re-energising vision
An energy transition done right can become our way out of this predicament. It can increase our resilience, minimise energy costs and entropy (chaos), and re-energise society and democracy. The current systems —including our energy and political systems— require some major remodeling.
So here’s a thought: there is a better way. A system that is more decentralised and democratic, allowing for greater efficiency, cooperation and social buy-in. Built not around ‘energy security’ —a term often used to justify passing any cost on to society— but around resilience, which is a more comprehensive term that also captures our ability to cope with environmental, climate or economic crises.
This means communities at the centre: local energy projects organised bottom-up rather than top-down, scaling up to a global effect and solution. Not about megaprojects that are chronically over budget (financial and planetary) and permanently delayed. But for this shift to happen, and not be treated as verboten, we need to put pressure on our political representatives.
What a resilient energy system actually looks like
In practical terms, this transformation rests on a few core pillars. It starts with a rapid shift to renewable energy sources — resources that are locally available, strengthen self-sufficiency and minimise environmental damage. Energy efficiency is equally central, not only in terms of reducing consumption, but also through better use of high-quality energy (exergy) and more systemic thinking about how energy is produced and used. Electrification must follow, across heating, industry and transport, supported by a more decentralised system that boosts resilience and autonomy. This transition also requires new approaches to energy management, including digitalisation and virtualisation, as well as sustained investment in skills and competences.
Together, these elements form the backbone of an energy system designed to benefit 99.9% of the society, instead of the 0.1%. It is a winning policy.
Various independent and transparent energy transition models exist. Most of them share the above fundamental aspects, with concrete timelines and trajectories. One example would be a roadmap presented by Mark Jacobson (and others) from Stanford, another one – the concept of energy transition to electroprosumerism proposed by Jan Popczyk and supported by the Climate Change Committee of the Polish Senate, with much emphasis on its social aspects and values. A further example is the Paris Agreement Compatible (PAC) scenario, developed by the EEB and CAN Europe, which demonstrates that achieving a 100% renewable energy system is both technically feasible and economically beneficial for Europe.
Crucially, these models show that the investment payback time would be less than 10 years. This is not about budget cuts or increasing debt. It is about boosting the economy in a more sensible, fairer manner – by creating meaningful jobs and opportunities for small and mid-size firms. Uruguay, which has a lower GDP per capita than Germany or Poland, managed to transition to a renewables-based electricity mix in less than 10 years.
Power from the bottom up
It is useful to rethink energy like this: our goal is maximum self-reliance at the most granular level possible. In practice, this means installing solar panels and batteries, improving the energy efficiency of our home and devices, and using energy in harmony with nature — for instance, by charging the battery of our car (if we have one) when the electricity is cheap (it’s windy or sunny), and using that stored electricity to power our house when the electricity is expensive (e.g. Dunkelflaute).
It might be difficult to reach 100% of autonomy though, so maybe 50% would be a good start, achievable step by step.
And we rarely act alone. We are part of a larger community: neighborhoods, villages, municipalities or cities. At these levels, scaling up becomes easier and more efficient: a wind turbine can power a village; a heating district system can serve a neighborhood. The transition grows from bottom up: household, community, village, municipality, city, country, continent.
Energy will be balanced locally mostly, based on our local demand patterns and needs, but by being interconnected, we can further increase resilience and efficiency.
As autonomy increases, our vulnerability, exposure to blackouts or attacks decreases. It should not be the other way around, meaning adding large gas-fired or nuclear power plants and then building out the grid and making us dependent on this centralised, fragile, expensive and easily disrupted infrastructure.
The nuclear distraction
Yet this is precisely the direction the Polish Ministry of Energy appears to be taking. Their new version of the National Energy and Climate Plan has just been presented, and the focus seems to be on more coal, more nuclear, more biomass (meaning wood). This is absolutely disheartening.
One of the major problems affecting efforts to push the energy transition forward (and its public perception) is the lack of transparency, alongside misinformation and disinformation. Nuclear is a prime example, where multiple flaws, like safety risks or extremely low systemic efficiency (SMRs even less efficient than conventional reactors), and inflexibility do not seem to matter. Exploding costs, constant subsidies or unresolved problems with radioactive waste storage? Still marketed as safe, clean, cheap and modern.
Intrusive state and corporate propaganda about nuclear power, enabled by the media, appears to be very effective these days. Enter AI-generated Maria Skłodowska-Curie, who got entangled in this as well, helping the Polish public ‘understand atoms’, as part of a national campaign. Nuclear power is framed as ‘energy sovereignty’ — which is baffling, considering that we would need to import the technology, fuel and also become even more dependent on foreign creditors.
The facts tell a different story. About half of uranium comes from Russia and Kazakhstan. Europe remains dependent on Russian nuclear fuel, produced through energy-intensive processes that burn fossil fuels. Poland’s first planned nuclear power plant has been described as the most expensive ever built, with the high costs being passed on to taxpayers.
Ukraine tragically demonstrates how dangerous and fragile centralised nuclear power-based systems are in wartime. Historian Serhii Plokhy in his latest book ‘The Nuclear Age’ discusses the new problem of nuclear energy sites being used in warfare and that any of the world’s 440 existing nuclear reactors might become a dirty bomb. Adding SMRs to the picture – which do not even exist yet but are heavily lobbied for in Poland and Europe – only multiplies risks, including sabotage and terrorism.
The opportunity of the century
None of these grim scenarios are inevitable. The EU can play a pivotal role in shaping the energy transition as a positive, disruptive breakthrough. The choice is clear: pursue a resilient, people-centred energy system, or double down on costly distractions that delay real solutions, with the associated burden and debt.
The European Commission‘s initiative to strengthen the EU’s energy security framework offers an opportunity to rethink the narrative altogether. What is proposed in the Polish concept of electroprosumerism is to use a different language, replace energy security with crisis resilience. It is about a change in the perception of energy: from looking at it through the prism of energy sectors/corporations to seeing it through the prism of the needs of societies and people. In an era of polycrises, we believe this framing better suits our world and reflects the challenges we are facing.
This transformation of energy, society and economy is a chance to save our civilization from climate catastrophe. It is the opportunity of the century. The only real risk now is hesitation. We must accelerate, not stall. Double down, not slow down.
