Confirmation Hearings of the European Commissioners-Designate – CATF’s Key Questions 

Introduction

As the new legislative term begins, the EU institutions are set to define the direction and priorities for EU climate policy for the next five years. This is a critical opportunity to reassess the current approach, identify remaining gaps, and determine next steps to achieve climate neutrality, ensure a just transition, and support the EU’s economic competitiveness. 

In a few weeks’ time, the European Parliament will assess the suitability of Commissioners-designate for their proposed portfolios in public hearings. This briefing seeks to support Members of the European Parliament in assessing the Commissioners-designate visions for the new term. It intends to contribute to the debate and support the Parliament’s work by pointing to some of the fundamental policy questions EU policymakers will need to address in the 2024-2029 legislative term. It builds on President Von der Leyen’s Political Guidelines for the next European Commission, as well as the “The future of European competitiveness – A competitiveness strategy for Europe” (the Draghi report). 

As a science-based climate NGO, Clean Air Task Force (CATF) focuses on realistic and systems-centred solutions that will enable the EU to meet its climate ambition in a socially and economically viable way. We hope such solutions will feature in the forthcoming legislation and will be integrated in the mission letters to the Commissioners as they start their mandate. CATF has identified the following questions for, but not limited to, these Commissioners portfolios that will ensure a pathway towards decarbonisation and climate neutrality. 

• Executive Vice-President for Clean, Just and Competitive Transition, Ms Teresa Ribera 

• Executive Vice-President for Prosperity and Industrial Strategy, Mr Stéphane Séjourné 

• Commissioner for Energy and Housing, Mr Dan Jørgensen 

• Commissioner for Climate, Net Zero and Clean Growth, Mr Wopke Hoekstra 

The suggested portfolios for the Commissioners-designate are overlapping, as the issues of energy, climate, industry and just transition inherently interlinked. Commissioners will need to work together to develop coherent policies that address climate, economic, and social needs, with a decarbonisation approach that marries energy security and climate and delivers on long-term economic prosperity and competitiveness. The suggested questions are therefore relevant across Commissioners-designate portfolios, and it will be important to understand how they will avoid overlap, but also ensure collaboration across DGs to reinforce and deliver on shared priorities. 

Clean Industrial Deal and climate ambition  

Commission President von der Leyen has pledged to propose a Clean Industrial Deal within the first 100 days in office, to channel investment in infrastructure and industry, create lead markets, and speed up planning, tendering, and permitting. This stems from a broader policy debate on the EU’s economic competitiveness and the future of industry in Europe. The Clean Industrial Deal will presumably build on the Draghi report and on the work started in the last term.  While it’s encouraging that the EU is addressing Europe’s competitiveness gap, simply announcing another “Deal” won’t be enough. This is a pivotal moment for the EU to reclaim its status as an economic and technological leader. 

In February 2024, the Commission presented its recommendation for the EU climate target for 2040, based on a detailed impact assessment and the advice of the European Scientific Advisory Board on Climate Change. It recommended reducing the EU’s net greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by 90%, relative to 1990, by 2040. This work has initiated the political process and sparked a debate on a pivotal milestone in the EU’s pathway towards climate neutrality.  A legislative proposal for the 2040 target is expected early 2025, to be presented together with the Clean Industrial Deal.  

The Clean Industrial Deal should be developed as a joint decarbonisation and competitiveness plan, and closely align with the EU decarbonisation pathway. As highlighted by the Draghi report, decarbonisation presents an opportunity for the EU to lower energy prices and to take the lead in clean tech, while also increasing its energy security.  

Proposed questions for Commissioners-designate:  

The competitiveness and decarbonisation agendas should closely align and strengthen, but not replace, each other.  In light of this: 

• How will you ensure that decarbonisation is at the core of the Clean Industrial Deal and that the ambitious 2040 targets and the Clean Industrial Deal are closely aligned and strengthen each other? 

• Will the Clean Industrial Deal include a clear plan to foster rapid industrial transitions across hard to decarbonise sectors?  

• Which sectors and clean technologies will be included in the Clean Industrial Deal and in the Industrial Decarbonisation Accelerator Act? 

• How will you ensure that the EU’s research and innovation policy is sufficiently linked to the Clean Industrial Deal? 

• Will the Clean Industrial Deal and the Green Deal be supported by adequate investment signals and funding mechanisms to close the finance gap? How will you ensure that new investments by 2030 are genuinely directed towards clean energy technologies and infrastructure, achieving the required scale for carbon neutrality while preventing carbon lock-in?  

• What will be the scope of the European Competitiveness Fund and how will it be funded?  

Key points for the answer to cover: 

• The new Commissioners should ensure that the competitiveness agenda will not overshadow the Green Deal goals, but  fully integrate decarbonisation considerations and be developed in parallel with ambitious 2040 targets, enshrining the 90% emissions reduction in EU legislation. Competitiveness and climate change are two challenges to be addressed together. As outlined in the Draghi report, the decarbonisation process can ensure lower energy prices for EU industries, increases energy security, and offers opportunities with clean tech development and new markets. 

• To ensure alignment between the Clean Industrial Deal and the Green Deal, Commissioners should consider developing and implementing a clear plan to foster rapid industrial transitions across hard-to-abate sectors, identifying challenges and solutions for their decarbonisation. 

• The Clean Industrial Deal and the Industrial Decarbonisation Accelerator Act should cover the broad range of technologies that will be required for the decarbonisation of European Industries. Among others, CCS and clean hydrogen should be part of the scope.  

• Both the net-zero transition and the competitiveness challenges will require massive investments. The Draghi report outlined that the EU will need a minimum annual additional investment of EUR 750 to 800 billion to address the competitiveness and growth challenges. Similarly, the European Commission estimated €360 billion will be needed to meet the 2030 decarbonisation goals, with these budget need expected to sharply increase to reach climate neutrality by 2050. The finance gap is one of the main challenges for the EU to be decarbonised and competitive. The Commissioners should present a clear plan, covering the EU level funding and taking into consideration the upcoming negotiations on the multiannual financial framework (MFF), but also including how to coordinate efficiently national and regional funding and how to mobilise private fundings. 

Clean firm power and technology optionality 

The world is going to need more energy as global energy demand is expected to grow in the next decade. This growing demand must be met while minimising emissions. At the moment, we are still very far from a decarbonised energy system: 80% of the world energy consumption is coming from unabated fossil fuels, a percentage that has remained stable these last three decades as energy consumption was increasing. The EU needs to decarbonise its energy grid and at the same time meet additional demand for electricity at an affordable cost for both industry and citizens. Doing so, while maintaining reliability, will be an enormous challenge. 

Renewable energy sources like wind and solar will be critical to this effort, but they can be constrained by daily and seasonal variability, and by their significant land use. To avoid falling back on unabated fossil fuels, as we are doing now in the EU, or needing costly overbuild capacity of wind and solar, which would also raise serious land-use issues, the EU will need to advance a broader range of low-carbon energy options to complement renewables deployment and enhance overall system reliability.  

In order to meet energy demand reliably while reducing emissions, the EU will need to pursue clean firm power, which refers to power sources that generate electricity on-demand, regardless of the weather or the time of day, with minimal emissions. The technologies that can help provide clean firm power include geothermal energy, nuclear energy, clean hydrogen, and carbon capture and storage (CCS).  

Proposed questions for Commissioners-designate: 

• What is your view on the need for an expanded set of technologies that can provide clean firm power and how do you plan to ensure the full decarbonisation of the grid 24/7?  

• How do you see the role of these technologies complementing renewables to achieve the EU’s goals of climate neutrality, energy security, and economic competitiveness?  

• How will you ensure that this expanded set of technologies receives adequate support at the EU level, allowing Member States to incorporate them into their clean transition strategies, adopted to their national and local context? 
• Following the Parliament INIs on geothermal energy and on Small Modular Reactors (SMRs), how do you plan to support the deployment of these two clean firm technologies? Will the Commission develop and implement comprehensive strategies and action plans for these technologies? 

Key points for the answer to cover: 

• The new Commission should acknowledge that a broad spectrum of technologies will be needed to decarbonise the EU energy system. The Commissioners should assess technologies based on their potential for emissions reduction role in the decarbonisation process. A realisation is needed that wind and solar alone are unlikely to bring a full decarbonisation of the EU energy system on their own, and that other technologies, providing non-weather dependant clean energy, will be needed to complement them. Consequently, more attention will be required for clean firm power technologies.  
• The Commission should ensure fair treatment of the different clean technologies expected to play a role in the decarbonisation pathway. For example, low-carbon energy solutions have been mentioned as required in the transition, but many European tool do not cover them and only focus on renewable options.  
• The last Parliament asked specifically the Commission for more actions on geothermal energy and on SMRs, two important clean firm technologies, in two own-initiative reports. The new Commissioners should deliver on these calls.  

Carbon capture and storage technologies

Carbon capture and storage (CCS) is an essential technology for the EU to reach climate neutrality, as it is the only tool available for some industries to decarbonise and the most cost-effective means to decarbonise others. Evidence shows that a massive scale-up of CCS is needed for Europe to achieve its climate targets.  

With the Net Zero Industry Act (NZIA) and the Industrial Carbon Management Strategy (ICMS), the EU achieved major progresses for CCS last term, but more remains to be done to ensure this technology plays its role in the EU decarbonisation.  

The NZIA includes a storage capacity targets for 2030 of 50 million tons in the EU. This is a very realistic target as the proposed projects in the EU already amount to over 80 million tonnes per year by 2030. However, these projects are still in the early stage. Moreover, most of the storage capacity currently being developed is located in Northern Europe, mainly in Denmark and the Netherlands or, outside the EU, in the UK and Norway. This regional concentration poses challenges for industrial facilities in other regions, requiring long-distance CO₂ transport, which could increase the cost of these technologies by up to 6 times for industries located in Eastern and Southern Europe. 

In addition, there is a risk that the emerging market of CO2 storage will initially be mainly in the hands of a few oil and gas companies, raising questions on de facto monopolies, and fair pricing, and access to the storage.  

Proposed questions for Commissioners-designate: 

• What measures will you take to deliver on the CO₂ injection capacity targets of NZIA while ensuring the integrity of the Single Market? How will the Commission check that the reports by the Member States and the obligated entities are comprehensive and match on the ground progress? What measures will the Commission consider if risks of delay are identified? 

• On storage and transport infrastructure, how will you ensure that storage sites and transport networks are optimally located to support CCS deployment at the lowest possible cost to producers and consumers across all the EU?  

• Will market measures, such as open access, transport pricing, and competition be covered in the upcoming CO₂ Regulation? 

Key points for the answer to cover: 

• The Commission should dedicate sufficient resources to closely monitor the progress achieved towards the NZIA injection capacity targets. In case of risks of delay, the Commission should take action as fast as possible, identifying the cause and the potential solutions. The Commission will need to ensure Member States and obligated entities are doing their best to deliver on the CCS targets and are held accountable.  

• Given that CO2 transport and storage networks will have an important impact on cohesion in the EU, the Commission will need to ensure coordination at the EU level of the transport and storage infrastructure, with a specific attention to ensure affordability of CCS for companies across different regions of the EU. 

• The CO₂ Regulation planned in the ICMS should not only cover CO2 transport but also CO₂ market design, with measures to ensure fair competition, open access, and transparent pricing so that all industries that need this technology can access it at a fair price. 

Carbon removals

Given that some sectors, such as agriculture or aviation, are unlikely to fully decarbonise, carbon dioxide removal (CDR) will be required to achieve net neutrality in 2050 and to reach negative emissions after that.  

For CDR to fulfil these roles in a timely way, more R&D support will be required for industrial carbon removal technologies. Moreover, the different kinds of removals, as well as their role and use, need to be clarified. Geological storage and land-based sequestration have different timelines for storage, costs, and technology readiness levels (TRLs).  

In this legislative term, both the 2040 targets and the revision of the EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) could impact the efficient deployment of carbon removals in Europe. 

The European Commission’s Communication on the EU’s climate targets for 2040 recognises that the recommended 90% net target will require emissions reductions and carbon removals. The Impact Assessment indicates that 400 Mt carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) of carbon removals will be required annually by 2040, but it does not set specific targets for different types of removals. 

In addition, the integration of carbon removals into the EU ETS is gaining increased attention. The Commission was tasked with delivering a report by 2026 assessing the options on if and how to do so. Integrating permanent removals in the EU’s climate policies is essential, but it should not undermine the goal of EU ETS, which is to reduce emissions. It should also balance trade-offs between cost-effectiveness, environmental integrity, and distributional concerns. 

Proposed questions for Commissioners-designate: 

EU climate targets for 2040 

• How do you see the roles of a) emissions reductions, b) land-based sequestration, and c) carbon removals with permanent storage in achieving the net EU 2040 climate target? How will you ensure that these very different processes are scaled up sufficiently to enable the reaching of the overall target? 

• Will you support separating land-based sequestration and permanent carbon removals from emissions reduction targets?

EU ETS 

• Which set of assessment criteria will the Commission use to evaluate the different policy options for integrating carbon removals into the EU ETS, their respective risks and benefits? How will you ensure the environmental integrity, economic efficiency, and feasibility of each policy option? 

Key points for the answer to cover: 

• The Commission should come up with three different targets for the 2040 goals. The EU should have a reduction target (of at least 90%, as recommended in the Commission’s communication), a target for land-based sequestration, and a target for carbon removals with permanent storage. To meet the 2040 climate goals,  the EU will need to set separate carbon removal targets for industrial and land-based sectors. This approach will allow to monitor and enhance their distinct contributions effectively. It is crucial given their different permanence for storage, costs, readiness levels, or monitoring mechanisms. Moreover, high-quality land-based removals could be leveraged in the short term while industrial and technological solutions are scaled up. 
• There are different possible approaches to introduce CDR certificates into the ETS, with several risks to consider. Any integration of CDR into compliance markets must be based on a solid foundation of standards and monitoring, reporting and verification protocols. Any shift from public sellers of emission allowances to private sellers of negative emission certificates would also require new governance and stability mechanisms and an overhaul of the EU ETS. Details on implementation and safeguards against risks, such as excessive use of biomass, have been missing from the discussions so far. Restrictions on the supply of CDR into the market, reduction of the ETS cap for each CDR credit entering the market, or the creation of an intermediary public body which manages the inflow of CDR are all options that should be carefully assessed.  

Clean hydrogen

The European Commission adopted extremely ambitious hydrogen targets in the RePowerEU Plan, intended to wean the EU from Russian fossil fuels. As outlined in the Court of Auditors’ report, a reality check is urgently needed on the EU’s hydrogen ambition. Clean hydrogen production in Europe is currently very limited and shows few signs of ramping up in line with the timeline and scale proposed in RePowerEU. Hydrogen also requires considerable amounts of energy, infrastructure and other resources to be produced and transported to deployment sites across the continent.  

In addition, while the Commission acknowledges the role of low-carbon hydrogen in the transition, mechanisms aimed at supporting hydrogen deployment, such as the Hydrogen Bank, only focus on renewable hydrogen. 

It is likely that clean hydrogen will remain a limited resource in the EU in the coming decades. If the EU is to reach its ambitious climate goals, it needs to adopt a strategy that is grounded in reality, not aspiration, and carefully outline where clean hydrogen will be most needed, where and how it will be produced, and how hydrogen molecules will be moved safely and efficiently from production sites to end use applications. 

Proposed questions for Commissioners-designate: 

• Do you think the EU ambition and targets on hydrogen should be reassessed, in light of the European Court of Auditors renewable hydrogen report? Will the Commission develop a roadmap on hydrogen production and imports? 

• How will you support the development of clean hydrogen production in Europe during the transition to climate neutrality? Will you differentiate between renewable and low-carbon hydrogen? Would you consider opening the support tools currently limited to renewable hydrogen production only, such as the Hydrogen Bank, to include low-carbon hydrogen production pathways? 

• How will you and the Directorate-General for Energy support responsible hydrogen deployment that will ensure clean hydrogen is supplied to the sectors and applications that need it most? Will you consider a prioritisation framework to ensure that clean hydrogen is first directed towards industries that need it the most? Will you consider mandatory priority end-use sector commitments for hydrogen relevant support schemes? 

Key points for the answer to cover: 

• There is a pressing need for a reality check on hydrogen targets and plans in the EU. The amount of clean hydrogen available in the EU is likely to be much lower than what was proposed in RePowerEU. The Commission should acknowledge this reality and focus the driving the available limited resource into sectors that need it the most for its decarbonisation, and seek alternative and complementary decarbonisation pathways to address wider sectoral decarbonisation.  

• Given the amount of clean hydrogen that will be needed to decarbonise these hard-to-abate sectors, the EU should move from a production approach based on hydrogen colours to an approach based on real GHG emissions across the full hydrogen lifecycle, ensuring the fastest possible decarbonisation by integrating and supporting different clean production pathways. 

• Clean hydrogen should be clearly acknowledged as part of the EU’s decarbonisation portfolio but not the solution to decarbonising all EU sectors. An EU prioritisation framework will be needed for the EU to direct clean hydrogen to sectors with no other energy efficient and cost-effective decarbonisation options. It is unlikely that clean hydrogen will be available in large quantities and at affordable prices in the near future. European policymakers should therefore focus on steering the limited supply to sectors where it is most needed. A priority should be to replace existing unabated hydrogen production in industries like chemicals and fertiliser manufacturing. Additionally, hydrogen should be prioritised for sectors with limited alternatives for decarbonisation, such as shipping and aviation. On the contrary, use cases that already have other technoeconomic decarbonisation options available to them, such as residential heating and passenger car fuel, should be discouraged from utilising the limited hydrogen supply by policy. 

Mitigating methane emissions 

Anthropogenic methane emissions come from the energy, waste, and agriculture sectors. Methane emissions are often referred to as the ‘low-hanging fruit’ in the fight against climate change, because their global warming potential is over 80 times greater than that of CO₂ over a 20-year period, and methods and technologies to reduce methane emissions are already available. Moreover, methane can be harnessed to heat homes and power industry instead of being wasted into the atmosphere, thus contributing to energy security in Europe.  

Implementation of the Methane Regulation 

With the adoption of its Methane Regulation, the EU has taken a major step towards addressing methane emissions, both domestically and from imported energy products. However, obligations on imports will be designed and implemented in this new term, and the level of ambition and efficiency of the Regulation will depend on the quality of the forthcoming delegated and implementing acts. 

Methane in the agriculture sector 

As clearly laid out in the Commission’s Impact Assessment of the EU’s 2040 climate target, achieving 90% net GHG emissions reduction will require a stronger mitigation of emissions from agriculture, including methane emissions from enteric fermentation and manure management. Different good practices such as breeding for low emissions livestock, feed additives, or manure management can play a role in reducing methane emissions.  

Building on the recommendations from the Strategic Dialogue on Agriculture, President von der Leyen will present a Vision for Agriculture and Food in the first 100 days of the new Commission, looking at ensuring a competitive and sustainable farming sector, which could be a key tool to address methane emissions.  

International Action  

At COP26, the EU and the US initiated the Global Methane Pledge, which now has 155 signatories, to collectively reduce methane emissions by 30% from 2020 levels by 2030. In her Political Guidelines for the Next European Commission, President von der Leyen stressed that the EU should remain a leader in international climate negotiations and continue to champion methane emissions mitigation, working with key partners and in international fora to deliver on the Global Methane Pledge.  

Proposed questions for Commissioners-designate: 

Implementation of the EU Methane Regulation 

• The last European Commission built considerable momentum around methane with the Global Methane Pledge and the Methane regulation, how would you build on this momentum and ensure methane mitigation is a climate, economic, and political priority in this term?  

• How will you ensure that the Methane Regulation’s measures on emissions from imported fossil fuels are ambitious and delivered on time? 

Methane emissions from agriculture 

• Will measures on methane emissions reduction be included in the Vision for Agriculture and Food?  

• How do you plan to incentivise agricultural methane emissions reductions, including best practices like low-emission breeding, feed additive use, and manure management, both in the Vision for Agriculture and Food and in the Common Agriculture Policy (CAP)? 

International action  

• How will you ensure that the Global Methane Pledge, i.e. reducing methane emissions by 30% by 2030, is delivered on, both by the EU as well as by the other signatories? How would you ensure the European Commission shows global leadership in achieving this goal? 

• How will you ensure that Member States present comprehensive Methane Action Plans (including sectoral emissions reduction targets and specific measures to meet them? 

• How will you leverage the “You Collect We Buy” initiative to build partnerships and capacity in key third countries to ensure proactive emissions reductions from imported energy products? How will you ensure that methane emissions reductions are a priority through the EU’s climate diplomacy architecture and in multilateral fora? 

Key points for the answer to cover: 

• The Commission should ensure a swift revision of the EU Methane Action Plan, committing to sectoral emissions reduction targets. It should also encourage all Member States to present a comprehensive plan to reduce their methane emissions, following the lead of Finland, Sweden, and the Netherlands. The Governance Regulation could be used to ensure these national plans become the norm.  

Implementation of the EU Methane Regulation 

• The new Commissioner should commit to keep methane emissions reduction high on the priorities list as one of the most efficient ways to slow-down climate change and give the other climate measures the time to deliver. 

• The new Commissioner should commit to supporting consistent implementation and compliance with the new Methane Regulation, including by facilitating technical support and exchanges between Member States and third countries. 

• The Commission should ensure that the forthcoming methodologies that will shape the new methane  import standards are as ambitious as possible, and avoid any loopholes that would undermine emissions reductions. The Commission should encourage proactive emissions reductions before 2030 through market-based incentives.  

Methane emissions from agriculture 

• Given the climate impact of methane emissions and the existing potential mitigation options in agriculture, the Commission should ensure that Vision for Agriculture and Food and, later on, the revised CAP will include incentives and concrete measures to support the deployment of technologies to cut and mitigate methane emissions.  

• As some technologies such as feed additives would require further R&D, the Commission should ensure sufficient funding for innovative technologies that could decrease agriculture emissions.  

International action  

• The Commission should continue its role of global leader on methane emissions reduction, and be an advocate for further action on this issue in all relevant international fora, such as COP, the G7, and G20, as well as for International Financial Institutions (IFIs) and Multilateral Development Banks (MDBs). 

Emerging technologies: Superhot rock geothermal energy and fusion energy

According to the IEA, 35% of the GHG emissions reductions needed to keep the 1.5 °C scenario will come from technologies not currently available on the market. The promotion of emerging clean firm generation resources – like superhot rock geothermal energy or fusion energy – should not be underestimated if Europe is to decarbonise on time.  

Superhot rock geothermal energy is an innovative engineered geothermal system (EGS) that aims to produce power from deeper and hotter conditions, reaching the 400°C. The depth required to reach 400°C rock varies – in some parts of the Earth’s crust the heat is shallow (2-5 km), and in some parts it is deeper. Superhot rock systems can be demonstrated with today’s drilling capabilities where heat is relatively shallow. This projected high energy per well of 30-50 MW means superhot rock could eventually be competitive with fossil power and be used for electricity or hydrogen generation, going beyond heating and cooling.  

Fusion is another innovative clean energy source that could produce abundant, zero-emissions energy. Paving the way for fusion commercialisation could allow Europe to integrate this carbon-free source into the energy mix. Europe has been leading on fusion plasma science and technology in the last 25 years, but is now at risk of lagging behind, as the UK and the US and China are taking the lead in the commercialisation path, i.e.,  building fusion prototype machines. 

Proposed questions for Commissioners-designate: 

Next-generation geothermal energy 

• How will you ensure that innovative next-generation geothermal technologies are supported, ultimately enabling all the EU Member States to harness this clean firm energy source? 

Fusion energy 

• Will you follow the recommendations from the Draghi report and develop an overarching EU innovation strategy for nuclear fusion energy?  

• What concrete support measures will you put in place to support the creation of a public-private partnership on fusion to promote its rapid, economically viable commercialisation? 

• Which kind of international alliances will you promote to deploy this new source of energy?  

Key points for the answer to cover: 

Next-generation geothermal energy 

• To make use of geothermal energy, the EU will need a comprehensive strategy looking at the current challenges and the policy framework needed to support demonstration, commercialisation, and scale-up of the technology. Given its potential to generate clean firm energy and boost energy security, superhot rock energy should be a key component of this strategy.  

• In addition, while Horizon 2020 supported different innovative geothermal projects, Horizon Europe has paid limited attention to R&D for geothermal. Demonstrating superhot rock geothermal energy at scale should be part of the next research and innovation agenda.  

Fusion energy 

• Fusion will need a clear strategy, moving from a focus on the construction of ITER and EU DEMO (DEMOnstration Machine) towards a focus on an actual supply of fusion based electricity to the grid and an efficient cooperation between a nascent private sector and the public one.  

• The EU should develop a roadmap focused on developing commercial solutions where ITER, a public funding DEMO (testing machine for the divertor being built in Italy), and eventual support machines like DTT, DONES (Demonstration Fusion Neutron Source), a Volumetric Neutron Source are developed.  

• The EU needs to identify key international strategic partners to speed up the deployment of Fusion technologies. 

Small Modular Reactors (SMRs)

In a context of growing concern on Europe energy security, small modular reactors (SMRs) have seen a renewed interest in different countries of Europe. A growing number of Member States are considering SMRs as a potential addition to their energy mix, as it is an energy-dense technology capable of producing vast amounts of carbon-free energy (electricity and heat) with a small land footprint, making it a potentially useful compliment to renewables. Pan-European coordination of efforts to advance this technology could accelerate deployment and result in Europe-grown SMR supply chain (including nuclear fuel) alleviating the energy security concerns and supporting deep decarbonisation efforts of Member States.  

At the end of the last legislative term, the Parliament’s own-initiative report called on the Commission for further support the deployment of this technology. Earlier this year, the Commission launched the European Industrial Alliance on SMRs to facilitate and accelerate the development, demonstration, and deployment of SMRs by the early 2030s. Additionally, Member States that look to deploy innovative nuclear technologies called for increased coordination and need for innovative financing mechanisms. 

Proposed questions for Commissioners-designate: 

• Given that many Member States already planning to deploy SMRs, how will you support these Member States in pursuing this clean firm energy source? How will you help them coordinate and jointly address challenges like high upfront costs of first-of-a-kind SMR unit and realise the full potential for cost reduction for N-th of a kind unit? 

Key points for the answer to cover: 

• To ensure the timely deployment of SMRs for the countries that decided to add them to their energy mix, EU actions and coordination will be needed. A comprehensive strategy for SMRs will be needed, as highlighted by the Parliament in its INI. Identifying challenges and solutions for the value chain could build on the outcomes of the SMR Industrial Alliance. To fully realise the potential advantage of economy of numbers in SMRs down selection of designs will be key in developing sizable orderbooks of 10-15 units minimum across Europe, thus supporting EU grown supply chains. An assessment will also be needed on funding needs and solutions.  Similarly, actions will be required on R&D and skills. 

Carbon removals