Sebastian Burduja: If the citizens do not support the energy transition, we will get nowhere
An interview with the Romanian energy minister on the green transition, development plans and energy policy of the Romanian government in the beginning of Trump 2.0 era
Malgorzata Kulbaczewska-Figat, Vladimir Mitev
Sebastian Burduja, Romanian Minister of Energy, answers questions from the Cross-Border Talks team on Romania’s energy policy in the context of green transition and decarbonisation. He explains what he meant when he said that he prefers a smart deal to a green deal, what are the realistic goals and pace for an energy transition in Romania, and could Romania become a regional hub for offshore wind energy. Other questions concern the just transition of the Oltenia and Hunedoara complexes and their future after the coal phase-out, the Romanian prosumer boom and the prospects for an even more citizen-led energy transition, as well as the minister’s relations with ecology-focused NGOs.
The interview took place on 7 April 2025.
Malgorzata Kulbaczewska-Figat: Mr. Burduja, a few weeks ago you announced the need to move from a Green Deal to a Smart Deal and you also said that Europe needs energy that is accessible to citizens and that is green – green in the last place. Meanwhile, the National Integrated Energy and Climate Plan of Romania refers to an 85% reduction of greenhouse gases in just five years compared to 1990, and by 2045 Romania should be climate neutral. So my question is: what will this switch to ‘Smart Deal’ from Green Deal change for Romania’s energy and climate goals, and if accessibility is more important than green transition, what changes in the national energy strategy can we expect?
Sebastian Burduja: Every country in the world, including Romania, has to solve this true energy dilemma. Energy security, energy competitiveness and accessibility or affordability and of course green energy and my own view is that this is the right order of priorities and that we cannot compromise energy security and the well-being of our citizens for a shock therapy of greening our energy sector, our economy.
Romania is the number one country in the EU in terms of reducing greenhouse gas emissions. I think it’s currently around 77% below the 1990 levels, and that in itself speaks to my country’s commitment to decarbonisation. At the same time, in order to protect the security of energy supply as well as the competitiveness of our economy, we cannot afford to continue to shut down coal-based units or even gas-based units without replacing them with similar baseload generation capacity, and at this point the vision is to move from coal to gas and then in the medium to long term everything to nuclear, which would ensure the country’s security of energy supply but also quite competitive prices. Just to point something out, we’ve shut down over 7,000 megawatts of coal and gas groups by 2022 and now when our consumption levels are high we often have to turn to imports which makes us vulnerable but it also makes us pay a very high price for those imports. Typically at a time when Romania is importing, so is Bulgaria, Greece, and so are other countries in our region, so energy becomes extremely expensive.
That’s the perspective that I’ve been arguing in Brussels: it’s time to put aside ideology and focus on very pragmatic, realistic concerns that our citizens have, because ultimately our duty is to represent the interests of our citizens and to make sure that this energy transition is smart. It must be supported by our people, because otherwise it will fail.
So what is a realistic direction for the energy transition? What kind of energy mix do you see in the next 15 or 20 years? What percentage of the overall energy mix could and should come from renewable sources, and which ones? How important should nuclear energy be?
I think for 2035 our targets are to have about 30 to 40 percent from renewables, solar and wind, about 20-30 percent from nuclear and the rest would come from high efficiency hydro and gas. Nuclear, as I said, is the solution for the longer term. Our plans are very ambitious, we have over 2000 megawatts in the pipeline, we are very advanced with the life extension of unit one in Cernavoda, it’s worked very well for us. I think Romania is the only country east of Berlin with western nuclear technology, with a western based nuclear programme. All the others are still dependent on former Soviet, now Russian technology, engineering, maybe even fuel.
We are also in the process of implementing the project for units three and four at Cernavoda nuclear plant, which will double the capacity there. At COP29 in Baku last year we signed the EPCM contract for 3 billion euros. The consortium, in our view, couldn’t be better. It includes Atkins Realis from Canada who own the CanDo technology that we already have in units one and two. There is Ansaldo, the turbine supplier, which is also involved in units one and two. There is the US through two very important companies, Flore and Sargent and Lundy. We are also well advanced with our SMR project in Doicești, which is based on a US technology called NuScale. We have evaluated the different technologies and decided that this is the way to go, at least in the short term.
It’s the only technology that’s been certified by a regulator, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, and our project is six modules of 77 megawatts each and it’s now in feed two, which is basically the detailed design, so by the end of this year, early next year, we’ll be able to reach the final investment decision phase. This would mean that by 2030 we hope to have at least one module in operation, which could be the first in Europe, could be one of the first in the world and we see this as a strategic competitive advantage that Romania could have in the region. As we all know, this technology is based on economies of scale, so the more you build, the cheaper it gets, and we hope to be able to support a Europe-wide SMR deployment programme, including the operation of Nuclear Electrica, with these facilities contributing with training.
We have the only simulator in Europe at the Polytechnic University in Bucharest. It’s functional, it’s already training future engineers, so it couldn’t be more important.
My next question would be about the offshore wind energy project. According to a World Bank study in 2024, Romania could cover more than a third of its total electricity needs from this one source, offshore wind energy, if only a massive investment is made – a massive investment and the construction of 360 turbines. There is even a roadmap for 2024 and I would like to ask what steps have been taken to make this project a reality because making Romania an offshore energy hub could have not only a national but also a regional impact. Is this project moving forward and what are the challenges?
For us, offshore wind is a great promise. We’re proud to have passed a law for it last year. I supported that law, I initiated it, and as far as I know we’re the only country in the Black Sea basin with an offshore wind law.
This law sets out the roadmap that we have to follow, so we’re now defining the target areas, because our concept is to do all the environmental studies, biodiversity and all that before the concessions, and once we put the concessions out to tender, these are viable areas where investors can just locate and build. We appreciate the World Bank’s help. In fact, the study shows that the total potential is a massive 76 gigawatts, but between three and seven gigawatts could be realised by 2032-2033.
I’m confident that we’ll see the first turbine spinning in the Black Sea on the Romanian side by then. We are also working on upgrading our infrastructure. We need to evacuate that energy somehow through the eastern shore.
Basically, the HVDC, the high-voltage direct current cable, between the Black Sea coast and the western border is moving forward. We’re nearing the end of the feasibility study phase and of course this project is part of the Green Corridor that we’re working with Azerbaijan, Georgia, Hungary and now Bulgaria wants to join and they’re welcome to do so and that will help to evacuate the energy from the two additional nuclear units as well as offshore wind. We are also creating some important incentives for investors.
Our law offers a stable 30-year concession. We hope this will be attractive and we’re also working on tapping EU funds to support these investments. Last year we had our first auction of contracts for difference. Of course it was for onshore solar and wind, but it went very well and this legislation also covers offshore wind, so we have the framework. When the projects are mature enough, we’ll be able to launch the CFD auction and of course that will guarantee a price for the sale of that electricity for about 15 years or so. That should be important to investors.
There are also challenges. Geopolitically, it’s a sensitive area. Obviously we’re all looking forward to the end of the conflict in Ukraine, but not under any circumstances. We think the peace needs to be secure and that’s good for everybody including the Black Sea region and for investment there because these are multi-billion dollar projects and if there’s a perception of a lack of security and predictability then of course they won’t happen.
We’re also happy to work together and we signed a Memorandum of Understanding I think last year with Greece and Bulgaria to share best practice on offshore wind and not just offshore wind and so we see this as a very collaborative effort to develop the Black Sea as an energy production hub and also, if you’ll allow me, to produce the equipment that will be used for these offshore windmills. I think Constanta would be a natural candidate. It’s the biggest port on the Black Sea and the deepest port, so why not produce the main parts that go into a wind turbine and windmill there and also create jobs and prosperity for our people.
Vladimir Mitev: One successful element of the green transition in Romania has been the prosumer boom. By September 2024, there were 150,000 prosumers in Romania, which was also due to the policy of the Romanian state, different incentives that it provided. But periodically the Romanian state intervened in this sector, for example discussing whether to put a tax on the money that people generate from prosuming activity, or discussing whether batteries to be put for households prosumers. So what are the prospects of this sector and what is the Romanian state’s current policy towards prosumers?
Prosumers are part of our energy future. They are a part of the 3D vision: decarbonisation, digitalisation and decentralisation. My own vision is that we should enable any household that wants to become a prosumer to do so, to take their energy into their own hands sometimes quite literally and be able to reduce their energy bills and also be more autonomous. In fact, in Romania I think we have a prosumer revolution underway. In 2020 I think we had only about 1,600 prosumers, today it’s more than 160,000. I’m still waiting for the latest report, but the number could even be around 200 000. The total installed capacity is around 2 000 megawatts, so more than our nuclear power plant, of course with a different capacity.
For prosumers, the main need is to modernise our infrastructure grid. We have accessed and signed contracts for over 1.7 billion euros in grants from the modernisation fund. 1.2 billion is only for distribution grid distributors, so all this work is helping to accommodate more prosumers. At the same time, we have eliminated the infamous, I would say, tax on sunshine, or the possibility of implementing it. There’s a new directive that essentially allows a member state to tax the energy produced. We have completely removed that from our laws which was a major demand from the prosumer community and there is currently no requirement for batteries so I think that would be a good idea as long as the state can also subsidise the batteries with grants because currently we are helping prosumers they get a VAT reduction for the solar panels and very soon there will be a law on batteries as well the VAT reduction. So there is a lot to do, I think the system has to be fair, so for example one idea we want to discuss publicly is how much of this energy, how much this energy costs, because essentially if you compensate the energy one-to-one, of course prosumers produce during the day when energy is cheap and consume at night or in the morning when there is no sun when energy is expensive.
So while there is a quantitative compensation scheme, I think it is also necessary to look at, you know, what is the monetary value of the energy produced/consumed and ensure a fair compensation, otherwise of course those who are not prosumers will be disadvantaged and our aim is to have a level playing field for all consumers.
There is a boom of prosumers, that is very good, but the criticism has been made that it is mostly benefiting the middle class in Romania. I would also like to ask you about the policies that you are planning or already applying towards the so-called energy poor people in Romania, who I guess are also not very few people.
Energy poverty is a critical area that is very close to our heart, we have about a third of our households that are in some degree of energy poverty and of course there’s about 10,000 households that are still in extreme energy poverty based on the data that we have, these are households that are essentially completely off the grid, they’re in remote villages and for them we have implemented a social programme with the local NGO called the intelligent energy association and we have put solar panels and batteries in remote households and for the first time they have been able to turn on their lights and their children no longer have to study by candle light and they can have a small fridge and a small TV and be connected to the world.
In addition, the Ministry of European Funds here has launched a half a billion euro programme to fight energy poverty, not only for households that are completely off the grid, but also for poor households, households that are vulnerable, and that includes panels, batteries, but also investments in energy efficiency. In the short term, of course, we’ve also had a compensation scheme for people’s bills, utility bills, both electricity and gas, which has ensured, based on Eurostat data, that for more than two and a half years, before I took office, we have had the fifth cheapest electricity in the EU and the fourth cheapest gas.
In the long term, I think doubling down on our investment in energy efficiency, including in the former communist or communist-era apartment blocks that we have across the country and across the region, is very necessary, and of course expanding the grid where it’s commercially viable, we’re investing quite a lot in expanding the grid for both electricity and gas, the challenges with gas expansion projects, the EU is very reluctant to finance them. We believe that gas is the transition fuel and we hope that the position in Brussels will also be more flexible, if not through EU grants, although that would be ideal, at least through accessible financing from international financial institutions such as the EBRD or the EIB or others, so that we can make sure that our energy reaches as many Romanians as possible.
In the autumn of the last last year you made a specific criticism or complaint that there is a bottleneck in the EU energy grid which prevents cheap energy from Western or Northern Europe from reaching our region in South Eastern Europe and I was curious to know what happened after that. Did you get any support from other colleagues at EU level or did anybody take any action to solve this problem of cheap energy reaching our region?
Anyone who looks at the map of the European energy grid knows and can see that unfortunately the interconnections in the heart of Europe are missing or are very inadequate and we formed a team mainly with Bulgaria and Greece but other member states also expressed their support, Hungary, the Baltic states, Finland and many others, because in principle we have to have the same rules in an internal market but in practice, very pragmatically, in terms of infrastructure, this is not an internal market and it is not a functioning market and so we have set very strict deadlines for member states to develop interconnections, I think Romania and Bulgaria, by the way, are in the process of developing interconnections. We are good examples of European model member states from that perspective, we are interconnected with all our neighbours, we have about 4,000 megawatts of interconnection capacity, so we can make sure that everybody around us is secure, we helped the Republic of Moldova a lot during the energy crisis. We speak the same language, Romanian, and we will continue to do so, but if you look at the energy map and the prices for the day ahead, you will see that on most days Romania, Bulgaria, Greece in particular, pay two to three times more than Western Europe, and that is a burden for households.
It is a burden on the economy, it is a lack of competitiveness of our companies, especially because, as you know, Europe as a whole already pays three times more for energy than the US or China, and so Eastern Europe, our eastern flank, is under an even heavier burden, and that needs to be addressed, and so after we raised the issue with the Commission and in the Council of Energy Ministers last autumn, I see that the new Energy Commissioner, Dan Jorgensen, has made interconnection his number one priority, I see that the President of the Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, has also mentioned interconnection as an urgent priority, I see that the issue has been discussed in the European Council among the Heads of State and Government of the Member States. I see that the President of the Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, has also often mentioned interconnection as an urgent priority, I see that the issue has been discussed in the European Council among the heads of state of the member states, and I think we’re on the right track, we just need to add to everything, if you like, carrots and sticks, so perhaps EU grants to support states that are working on developing interconnection, and we already have the PMI PCI instrument. I think that needs to be funded even more, but also, if you are a member state and you continue to refuse to develop your interconnections, then you should be subject to a certain level of penalty. I don’t think we can tolerate the situation any longer, but I think it is in everyone’s interest to have a truly single European market, whereas on most days energy is cheaper in the west, there are days when the wind blows on our coast and we have had prices lower than in western Europe or than in eastern Europe. It’s ultimately a common interest and I think it’s a matter of principle, following the vision of the founding fathers of the European Union, Jean Monnet and others. If this is really a union of coal and steel in the past and of energy today, then that energy must be able to flow freely and that will ensure a level playing field.
The last question would be on an issue related to the phasing out of coal and the challenges for particular regions. I would like to ask about the Oltenia and Hunedoara power complexes. What scenarios are being considered for them, how realistic is it to see their future in relation to renewable sources or to hydrogen, as Romania also has a hydrogen development strategy, and how long could the conversion take and how many jobs could be created, taking into account all the people who now work in coal energy production in these complexes?
Both issues are among our top priorities, we focus on them every day because ultimately it’s about people’s lives and beyond the green ideology we have to make sure that we really don’t leave anyone behind, not just rhetorically but actually on the ground. So of course we have a Just Transition Fund that is accessible, I think it’s over two billion euros. Both Oltenia and the Jiu Valley are eligible and these projects will start, I hope very soon it’s there with the Ministry of European Funds but of course our Ministry of Energy is also helping. In Oltenia, there is opencast mining, and there are still about 8,000 people working there and about 1,800 megawatts of installed capacity.
In Jiu Valley, there are 2,000 coal miners, deep mines and very little contribution to our energy mix – a single coal power plant remains functional, Paroșeni. Jiu Valley with its deep coal mines is supposed to be completely off coal by 2032. For Oltenia, the deadline set by the National Recovery and Resilience Plan is 1 January next year. We have argued that we can’t continue to shut down units without having an alternative and we have been working on that alternative which is new gas fired plants unfortunately for reasons unrelated to this we have not been able to close them.
Unfortunately, for reasons beyond our control, we put out tenders and we had no bids, several tenders, the prices of gas turbines have skyrocketed and over 50% increase, there is a huge demand, especially from Ukraine, and there are very few EPC contractors available to implement such projects, and so we will argue for a four-year extension in Oltenia, which will say that we can’t continue to shut down groups, and we will argue for a four-year extension in Oltenia, which will say that we can’t continue to shut down groups.year extension in Oltenia, which means that we will keep the 2032 deadline for phasing out coal from our energy mix.
But again, in Oltenia, we need this time to make sure that the gas groups come online and safely replace our coal production, especially since our unit one nuclear unit one is going to pause for two years in 2027 for its life extension project. In Oltenia, we have a restructuring plan, we have access to money from the modernisation fund, they’re working on over 700 megawatts of solar plus the two gas plants for a total of over 1300 megawatts and so it’s just a matter of timing, not a lack of commitment, but recognizing pragmatically and objectively the causes of the delays. It’s just a question of timing, not of lack of commitment, but of recognising pragmatically and objectively the causes of the delays and making sure that the two time horizons are aligned: the elimination of coal and its replacement by gas in the short and medium term and for the social problem.
Indeed it’s not easy for these people, I remember when we visited the mines in the Jiu Valley, at the end of one of our visits a miner approached me and said: look at my hands. Indeed, they were the hardest working hands I have ever seen, and the blackest because of the coal. He said I don’t care about all these windmills and solar panels, I care about my family and putting food on their table.
There must be this social dimension, because ultimately if our citizens do not support this energy transition, we will get nowhere and the transition will fail. So, again, what we stand for is pragmatism, moving away from shock therapy and pure ideology and focusing on solutions that actually work for people. At the same time, we intend to attract all possible EU funds for the energy transition, and I’m proud to note that last week we had a new meeting of the Modernisation Fund Committee, Romania is number one in the EU in attracting funds from the Modernisation Fund, a total of €10 billion has already been approved for our country and over six billion has already been paid into our accounts. My argument is not that we should do away with such investments, we need them, but to speed them up and also to be very realistic about what we can take out of our systems without putting something equivalent in place.
One more question from me too. There has been a conflict between you and the green NGOs in Romania, I was wondering if pragmatism is the line, are there any line issues where there is a common interest between the Romanian Ministry of Energy and these NGOs?
We are open to discussion and dialogue, we are going to have a public debate very soon, but what I have highlighted is a number of cases that we consider to be abusive of processes initiated by a number of NGOs, it’s not all of them, it’s really very few, where they have blocked investments or tried to block or delay much needed investments in Neptune Deep into the budget. These are investments which will double our gas production and our leadership position in the pockets of our citizens. These necessary investments in our gas project Neptune Deep project will bring over 20 billion euros into the budget, into the pockets of our citizens. They will double our gas production and consolidate our leadership position. We are already number one, the number one gas producer in Europe. And these NGOs have claimed that there are ancient relics on the bottom of the Black Sea. 160 kilometres from the coast, at depths of between 100 and a thousand metres, it’s hard to believe that somebody would build a court case around it, but they have. That’s why we’ve won all the cases against them, or actually initiated by them. We’ve won these cases so far and we’ll continue to fight this battle, but I don’t think it’s to anybody’s advantage.
And it certainly makes it harder to achieve energy independence, so in that sense I think we should all have common goals as responsible citizens. I can understand the NGOs and their environmental causes, I support them as long as it doesn’t make our country more vulnerable.
I don’t think we can negotiate with anybody the energy independence and security of our people. The same goes for our hydroelectric plants. We have more than 700 hydroelectric plants that were started before 1989. Their completion has been systematically challenged in court, even though many of them are almost finished. They are between 70 and 98 percent finished. It’s hard to rationally imagine any further environmental damage from a hydroelectric plant that is 98 percent finished. We are very keen to work with NGOs and to address any reasonable concerns at the same time, my mandate here at the ministry is to ensure that Romanians have access to energy that is secure, affordable and clean.
This report has been prepared with the support of Journalismfund, within the scope of a broader project concerning just transition in Bulgaria, Romania, Poland and Czechia.
Photo: The Romanian energy minister Sebastian Burduja during the interview with him (source: Cross-border Talks)
Subscribe to Cross-border Talks’ YouTube channel! Follow the project’s Facebook and Twitter page! And here are the podcast’s Telegram channel and its Substack newsletter!
Like our work? Donate to Cross-Border Talks or buy us a coffee!
About The Author
