SEE

For most industrial electricity buyers in South-East Europe, “hedging” still means one thing: fixing the price. This definition made sense in systems where price volatility was driven primarily by fuel costs, outages, or macro shocks, and where hourly price spreads were narrow. In such systems, locking in a forward price neutralised most meaningful risk. That […]

For most industrial CFOs in South-East Europe, electricity procurement has historically sat just outside the core financial narrative. Power was an operating input, negotiated by procurement teams, reviewed annually, and managed within tolerable variance bands. Sustainability added a new dimension, but it did not fundamentally alter the financial treatment of electricity. That separation no longer

For most industrial electricity buyers in South-East Europe, price risk is still intuitively understood as a single number. When discussions turn to power procurement, the focus remains anchored on the average megawatt-hour price secured over a year. This mindset is increasingly disconnected from how power markets actually function. In solar-heavy systems, the dominant risk is

When industrial power purchase agreements are discussed in South-East Europe, the conversation almost always starts with sustainability. Emissions reduction, green certificates, alignment with EU policy, and reputational benefits dominate both internal presentations and external communication. In many cases, these objectives are genuinely achieved. The electricity delivered under PPAs is renewable, traceable, and compliant with decarbonisation

For more than two decades, industrial electricity procurement in South-East Europe followed a relatively simple logic. Secure a long-term supply contract, prioritise price level over structure, and treat electricity as a predictable operating cost rather than a strategic risk variable. Even when liberalisation progressed and exchanges emerged, most industrial buyers continued to anchor decisions around