EU launches plan to tackle the energy crisis — is it enough?

For the second time in less than five years, Europeans are paying the price of the continent's dependency on imported fossil fuels. Since the start of the US and Israeli military operations against Iran, and the consequent closure of the Strait of Hormuz, the EU has spent an additional €24 billion on energy imports — more than €500 million a day.

Against the backdrop of this pressing fuel crisis, the European Commission has unveiled Accelerate EU. The package of measures has been defined by the Commission as a "toolbox to bring immediate relief to European households and industries [...] while putting Europe on a steady pathway to energy independence."

The objective is an energy union that delivers energy security and clean, abundant homegrown energy, affordable for EU consumers and businesses. Commission President Ursula von der Leyen framed the plan as both a short-term crisis tool and a long-term structural shift. "We must accelerate the shift to homegrown, clean energies. This will give us energy independence and security, and mean we are better able to weather geopolitical storms," she said.

What is Accelerate EU about?

The plan is built around five pillars.

• The first focuses on closer coordination between member states — including filling gas storage facilities and releasing oil stocks.
• The second involves protecting consumers through targeted income support, energy vouchers, and lower excise duties on electricity for vulnerable households.
• The third aims to produce more homegrown energy by removing barriers to electrification across the industrial, transport, and building sectors, alongside an EU-wide electrification target.
• The fourth pillar calls for upgrading grid infrastructure, fast-tracking the EU Grids Package, and launching so-called Energy Highways projects.
• The fifth centers on boosting investment, mobilizing both public and private capital, including through a Clean Energy Investment Summit planned for later in 2026.

The Commission also acknowledged that public funding alone will be insufficient to cover a projected €660 billion annual investment need in the energy transition through 2030, and is seeking to mobilize private investment through a Clean Energy Investment Strategy.

Lacking ambition

The plan won cautious praise from many quarters, but a chorus of criticism quickly followed its publication.

Campaign network European Environmental Bureau (EEB) welcomed the emphasis on electrification and energy savings as the right direction, noting that the EU appeared to have learned lessons from the previous energy crisis, when around €540 billion was spent shielding consumers from rising prices without tackling the underlying dependence on fossil fuels.

But the EEB also identified significant gaps. The effectiveness of AccelerateEU will depend on whether its ambitions translate into concrete national action, rather than simply managing the consequences of the fossil fuel dependency crisis after crisis.

One of the most pointed criticisms concerned the plan's failure to establish an EU-wide framework on windfall profit taxes. This is a form of levy that governments can impose on companies that earn unexpectedly high profits due to external circumstances.

Although the plan acknowledges that member states may tax energy companies' windfall profits, it leaves full discretion at the national level and does not establish any EU-level framework, despite calls from member states and civil society. The NGO Transport & Environment went further, expressing deep disappointment at the Commission's inaction: windfall oil profits have been estimated at €37 billion since the start of the crisis.

There were also concerns about what had been quietly dropped. The EEB noted that the plan weakens earlier emphasis on demand reduction, with several transport-related measures — including teleworking, public transport promotion, and cycling — removed from earlier drafts.

Actual implementation will be key

Energy storage advocates pointed to another blind spot. While welcoming the decision to set an EU electrification target and scale up energy storage, industry representatives criticized the Commission's failure to propose concrete measures to achieve the necessary levels of battery storage and other non-fossil flexibility, which they described as essential to reducing exposure to international gas prices.

Some MEPs questioned whether the Commission was moving fast enough. French Renew Europe MEP Christophe Grudler praised the push on electricity grids but warned against merely paying lip service: "AccelerateEU, yes, but let's really accelerate," reported EU News.

More scathing was the assessment from the left. Italian MEP Dario Tamburrano described the plan as "a mix of measures that were already planned but never implemented," which should have prevented crises such as the current one.

Whether AccelerateEU proves to be a genuine turning point or another missed opportunity will depend, critics agree, on implementation — and on whether member states can muster the political will to follow through.