Once exchange liquidity and cross-border capacity are understood, the decisive question in South-East Europe becomes operational rather than theoretical: who controls flows at the margin, on which borders, and during which hours. The answer is not uniform across the region. Dominance shifts by corridor, by time block, and by whether a market is deep enough […]
By early 2026, South-East Europe’s electricity market is no longer best understood through national supply–demand balances alone. The decisive variable has become where liquidity concentrates, how effectively it travels across borders, and how deeply intraday markets absorb volatility. Power exchanges in SEE are no longer merely trading venues; they are price transmission engines whose depth,
South-East Europe’s power market is often described through exchanges and interconnectors, but the day-to-day reality is that liquidity is delivered by trading houses. They determine whether price spreads close quickly or persist for hours, whether intraday volatility becomes an opportunity or a penalty, and whether industrial buyers are offered tight index-based supply or contracts loaded
Cross-border electricity flows are the hidden engine of price formation in South-East Europe. While power exchanges provide the visible price signal, it is interconnector availability, congestion patterns and directional flow economics that determine whether those prices converge or fragment. By early 2026, SEE no longer behaves as a collection of isolated national markets, but neither
January 2026 confirmed that South-East Europe’s electricity markets have entered a structurally different phase from the crisis years of 2022–2024. Prices remained elevated by historical standards, but the defining change was the return of tradable liquidity. Volumes increased, cross-border flows intensified, and professional trading activity reasserted itself across organised exchanges and interconnector corridors. The region
Europe’s energy transition is entering its most fragile phase. The period ahead is no longer defined by whether decarbonisation is desirable, financed or technically feasible. It is defined by whether it can be executed at scale under conditions of rising volatility. Power systems are being re-engineered while they remain in operation. Grid reinforcement, renewable deployment,
SEE as Europe’s energy shock absorber in a high-volatility decade Read More »
Europe’s energy transition is widely discussed as a capital challenge, a regulatory challenge or a political challenge. In practice, it is increasingly an engineering-capacity challenge. As power systems become more complex, digitised and interconnected, the volume of applied engineering required to move projects from concept to operation has expanded faster than the supply of qualified
Energy storage has moved from the margins of Europe’s energy system to its centre. Batteries are no longer pilot assets designed to demonstrate technical feasibility. They are now financial instruments, grid-stability tools and strategic infrastructure rolled into one. As storage deployment accelerates, the constraint is no longer whether batteries work or whether markets exist for
Europe’s energy transition is grid-limited. This is no longer a warning; it is a defining condition. Across the continent, renewable capacity is outpacing the physical ability of transmission and distribution systems to absorb it. Congestion, curtailment, redispatch and delayed connections are no longer exceptional events but structural features of the system. In this environment, the
Across Europe’s energy transition, the gap between announced projects and delivered assets is widening. Targets continue to rise, capital remains available and political alignment appears strong, yet a growing share of projects in core EU markets fail to move from late planning into physical execution. In contrast, a quieter pattern is emerging in South-East Europe.
Why energy projects clear in South-East Europe when they stall In core EU markets Read More »
