This week, a new alternative to the electricity market reform surfaced in European Union circles, separate from the plan backed by the Spanish Council presidency. The move adds a twist to the ongoing efforts to reach a unified approach in energy policy and market design, with a clear nod to France, whose energy profile includes a substantial share of nuclear power, alongside other EU states.
The fresh proposal, circulated to Europa Press, was signed by France, the Czech Republic, Bulgaria, Croatia, Hungary, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, and Slovenia. These nine members form part of a broader coalition that has forged a shared position within the broader nuclear energy alliance in Europe. The document appeared on the margins of the Stockholm Energy Council meeting held in Sweden this February, a gathering that drew together sixteen countries committed to strengthening cooperation around nuclear energy as a central pillar of Europe’s energy strategy and climate ambitions.
United by the strong role of nuclear energy in their energy mixes, these nine countries preserved in their draft the concessions originally proposed to extend the operational life of existing reactors. Yet they also removed certain controls designed to prevent market distortions, which has sparked concerns, particularly in Germany, about potential competitive imbalances.
The aim was to bridge gaps between the French and German approaches, pursuing a path that could unlock progress on the reform deal after a previous stalemate. Berlin had opposed financing arrangements that would allow contractholders to receive payments for price differentials from the time of purchase through to contract signing, arguing that existing nuclear plants could distort the market in favor of Paris.
The Spanish presidency sought a common ground that would set price parameters for extending nuclear plant lifespans while guaranteeing that incentives come with safeguards to avoid market distortions. Importantly, the approach would maintain member states’ autonomy to determine their own energy mix while aligning incentives with Europe’s broader energy goals.
However, France and its nuclear partners prefer to remove the market controls and the liability framework that would require a formal report to the European Commission, even as they press for extensions to the life of current facilities. This stance marks a significant shift from the path outlined by the Spanish plan.
The proposed package from these nine states eliminates several key mechanisms. It dismisses the notion that contracts for difference guarantee a precise, non-discriminatory settlement of price risks; it does away with transparent tender processes to determine fee levels; and it softens measures intended to prevent competition and trade distortions within domestic markets where revenue sharing to producers could occur.
It also removes the revenue allocation from end-user prices that would otherwise help soften electricity costs for consumers. Facing this shift, the Spanish presidency of the Council signaled that all proposals must be adapted to the current realities and that finding a way forward requires consensus among the European Union’s Twenty-Seven. Other diplomatic voices, however, warned that this alternative may not gain the needed backing from all member states.