author: Raluca Covrig, Director of Public Affairs & Communications, FPE
Energy is one of the sectors where the distance between an investment decision and its outcome can be very large. We are talking about projects worth hundreds of millions or even billions of euros, developed over several years and built to operate for decades.
Therefore, when we talk about investments in energy, predictability is not just a principle of good governance. It is one of the conditions that can determine whether an investment takes place or not.
An investor does not just need to know what the rules are today. He needs a reasonable degree of confidence in the direction in which they will evolve tomorrow.
In this sense, predictability is itself a form of competitiveness.
It’s not the regulation that’s the problem. Unpredictability can be.
The energy industry needs regulation. We need clear rules, objectives, and a framework that provides direction to a sector undergoing profound transformation.
Problems arise when changes are very frequent, implementation deadlines are too short, obligations overlap, or the regulation evolves faster than the infrastructure and market necessary for its implementation. Equally problematic can be the situation where, for certain technologies or new investments, the regulation does not yet exist.
In a sector with long-term investments, all of this translates into risk.
And Romania needs investments.
We are developing new production capabilities and have important projects in natural gas, renewables, nuclear, storage, and new technologies. The challenge is to build the conditions in which all of this can happen faster and, above all, in which long-term investments remain feasible.
Investments and competitiveness cannot be separated
We make a mistake when we treat the investments and the competitiveness of companies as two separate issues.
We cannot have energy security without investments, we cannot have investments without competitive companies, and we cannot have competitive companies when they are burdened to the maximum.
When we introduce a new tax, a new obligation or a new target, we must also consider the cumulative effect of these measures on companies' ability to continue investing.
Because there is a paradox here that we need to manage carefully: the same companies from which we expect investments in production, storage, new technologies, and decarbonization are also the ones that must finance and implement this transformation.
Their competitiveness and investment capacity are therefore directly related.
The dialogue must begin before implementation
I believe there is still an area here where we can do things better: the moment when the dialogue between the authorities and industry begins.
The industry should not be consulted only at the end of the process. Technical and economic expertise should be discussed earlier in the development of a solution and can help identify the effects and potential bottlenecks before they arise.
This does not mean that the industry decides public policy. The decision belongs to the authorities. But an effective and functional public policy must very well understand the reality it is going to regulate.
And this is all the more important when we talk about European policies.
A large part of the rules that influence the Romanian energy sector are being developed at the European Union level. If the dialogue between authorities and industry begins only when a European regulation must be implemented in Romania, we are already discussing it too late.
If we discuss with the industry during implementation, we discuss compliance. If we discuss before and during the negotiation, we can discuss strategy.
Romania must be present where the rules are being built
As a country, we need to identify in advance the European dossiers with major impact, analyze their effects on the Romanian economy and energy sector, and build national positions based on technical and economic realities.
The industry can bring data, technical expertise, information on the economic impact, and practical experience of implementation. The authorities can turn this information into arguments at the negotiating table.
It is not about constantly requesting exceptions for Romania. It is about ensuring that Romania’s realities, interests, and competitive advantages are understood and supported while the rules are still negotiable.
For me, this is the real partnership between the state and industry: not just trying to solve problems together after they arise, but also anticipating them and building the solutions in time.
From a reactive policy to a proactive one
If we were to discuss a single change in public policy that could have a significant impact on the Romanian energy sector in the coming years, it would be The transition from a reactive energy policy to a predictable and anticipatory one, built around investments.
Romania basically knows what it has to do.
We need new production capacities, the valorization of domestic resources, networks and interconnections, storage, flexibility and investment in new technologies.
I don't think we lack the list of goals.
What we need to build better is the continuity between these objectives and the investments that need to turn them into reality.
Romania today has important energy potential. The challenge is no longer just to demonstrate that this potential exists.
The challenge is to turn it into investments, into competitiveness and, ultimately, into energy security.
