Poland Milestone Achievement

 

Poland's renewable energy sector is booming in 2025 and beyond, driven by ambitious targets (56% renewable electricity by 2030), massive investments in solar (PV) and offshore wind, and regulatory shifts unlocking growth, with renewables already generating more power than coal in mid-2025. Key developments include significant solar expansion (45 GW planned by 2034), major offshore wind projects (18 GW planned), grid upgrades by PSE (€15bn investment), and a growing focus on energy storage (BESS) to manage intermittency, as Poland transitions from coal towards energy independence and regional leadership. 

Milestone Achievement: Renewables surpassed coal in electricity generation for the first time in June 2025, marking a significant energy transition milestone.

Ambitious Targets: Poland aims for 56% renewable electricity by 2030, with plans for 57GW of installed capacity by then.

Solar PV Dominance: Solar is leading growth, reaching ~20.7 GW by late 2024, with projections for up to 45 GW by 2034, supported by supportive auction schemes.

Offshore Wind Boom: A major focus is offshore wind, with plans for 18 GW operational within a decade and projects like Baltica 2 & Baltic Power underway.

Grid & Storage Investment: The Polish grid operator (PSE) plans €15bn in upgrades to handle increased renewables, requiring massive Battery Energy Storage Systems (BESS) to balance the grid.

Policy & Regulation: New rules (e.g., for onshore wind distance, direct lines for producers) are accelerating project development. 

Solar Photovoltaics (PV): Currently leads installed capacity and sees rapid expansion.

Wind Power (Onshore & Offshore): Significant onshore potential unlocked by relaxed rules, with major offshore projects planned.

Energy Storage (BESS): Crucial for managing the intermittency of solar and wind. 

Grid Bottlenecks: Transmission congestion needs major investment.

Permitting: Complex, multi-layered permitting remains a hurdle.

Curtailment Risk: Without storage, curtailment of renewable output could rise.

Poland is rapidly shifting from coal, becoming a major renewable energy market with strong industrial backing, aiming to be a Central/Eastern European energy hub, with projections showing renewables covering up to 70% of electricity needs by 2034. 

Poland is undergoing one of Europe's most impressive energy transformations, rapidly pivoting from its coal-heavy past to emerge as a powerhouse in renewables. Once reliant on coal for over 70% of its electricity, the country has slashed that to around 57% in 2024, with renewables now generating more than coal for the first time in mid-2025. 

 This shift is fueled by massive growth in solar and wind: solar capacity hit 17 GW by 2024, and onshore wind has already surpassed early targets, reaching over 14 GW by 2023. 

Backed by strong industrial muscle—think state giants like Orlen and Tauron pouring billions into green projects, plus Poland leading Europe in battery production and energy storage factories—the nation is positioning itself as a cleantech hub for Central and Eastern Europe. 

 With partnerships like the massive multibuyer renewable deal (the largest in CEE) and events like Re-Source Poland Hub driving collaboration, it's clear industry is all-in. 

Looking ahead, Poland's Energy Policy to 2040 aims for carbon neutrality by 2050, with projections showing renewables covering 56-70% of electricity by 2030 and up to 69% by 2040. 

 Grid upgrades are set to handle 70% renewable generation by 2034, blending solar, wind, nuclear, and storage to meet soaring demand. 

 This isn't just a transition—it's Poland stepping up as the energy leader for the region. Exciting times ahead!

Zeljko Serdar, Croatian Center of Renewable Energy Sources (CCRES)

Radioactive smoke cover

Europe could see a plume of radioactive smoke cover its skies if a nuclear plant explodes in the Ukrainian city of Zaporizhzhia if a disaster were to happen in the plant. According to the Ukrainian Hydrometeorological Institute, radioactive particles would mainly affect Ukraine, significant concentrations of radionuclides could reach the city of Kyiv, but would also affect neighboring EU countries such as Belarus, Lithuania, Estonia, Letonia, Poland, Romania, Moldova, Hungary, and Slovakia.

Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said Sunday that NATO leaders should discuss Ukraine's Zaporizhia nuclear power plant at a summit in Vilnius. Accusing Ukraine of "systematically damaging" the facility, Zakharova said that "the key attention of the NATO summit should be devoted to this. After all, the vast majority of alliance members will be in the zone of direct impact" if something happens at the plant, Zaharova said on Telegram.

What is behind Russia and Ukraine’s unprecedented mutual accusations over a possible explosion at the nuclear power plant of Zaporizhzhia – and the threat it would pose to Europe?

The 1986 accident at the nuclear power plant of Chornobyl, also on Ukrainian territory, is widely considered the worst disaster in the history of nuclear power – and still bringing shivers of horror to Europeans.

With its six VVER-1000 reactors, the Ukrainian Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant is the largest in Europe. It is, at present, on territory occupied by Russia and claimed as Russian under an internationally-unrecognized annexation.

The plant is close to the front line, as Ukraine is conducting a counteroffensive to free the occupied territories. However, the counteroffensive is not advancing as well as Kyiv would like.

While nothing much is happening at the front, there has already been a man-made disaster, namely the breach of the Kakhovka dam, which is undoubtedly linked to the military offensive. By blowing Kakhovka, a Ukrainian dam under the control of Russia, huge territories were flooded to create an obstacle for the Ukrainian counteroffensive.

Of course, Russia couldn’t care less about the ecological consequences.

The question is, could Russia do something similar in Zaporizhzhia?

Ukraine and Russia have blamed each other for shelling that has repeatedly downed power lines essential to cooling Zaporizhzhia’s six reactors and avoiding a nuclear meltdown.

They also traded accusations that by blowing Kakhovka, the other side sought to dry up the center’s cooling pond, which fortunately still has water.

Russia keeps repeating that the Ukrainian army is preparing an attack on Zaporizhzhia with the possible use of long-range missiles provided by the West.

This is perceived by Ukraine and by Western analysts as preparation by Russia for a ‘false flag’ attack, meaning that Russia will cause a catastrophe, blame Ukraine, and use it as justification for more drastic action.

The same happened with Kakhovka. Russia keeps claiming that Ukraine hit the dam, although experts say that only a powerful bomb inside the concrete structure of the dam wall could have produced the result we saw. Only the Russian army had access to this infrastructure.

Meanwhile, Ukraine claims that Russia has planted explosives on the roofs of two of the Zaporizhzhia reactors, the onus being on IEAE to go and verify.

The Ukrainians have good intelligence. They had warned about Kakhovka, which in the West was dismissed as preposterous.

At first sight, neither side has an interest in causing a nuclear disaster. Both Ukraine and Russia consider this territory as theirs, why should they contaminate it for many years to come?

But bombs on the roof of two of the reactors, if confirmed, would cause more noise than nuclear pollution, if any.

The reactors are behind steel casing and concrete walls and an accident with the release in the atmosphere of the content of the reactor, as happened with Chernobyl, is out of the question.

Moreover, the US has warned Russia that nuclear contamination of NATO member states (the closest to Zaporizhzhia being Romania and Bulgaria) would trigger Article 5, meaning that the US may inflict a heavy blow to the Russian army as a reprisal.

A bomb explosion in Zaporizhzhia could also be considered a ‘dirty bomb’ because of the nuclear reactors and the nuclear waste stored nearby.

Such a bomb would reverberate hugely, even with no nuclear contamination.

Russia would of course blame Ukraine, but first and foremost it would relish the psychological effect, the panic in our societies, hoping to discourage the West from supporting Ukraine militarily and achieving a ceasefire on the Kremlin’s terms.

The best our societies could do is not to panic if Zaporizhzhia makes big headlines. But we are humans, radioactivity is scary and our feelings will always dominate the discourse – perhaps exactly the result Russia wants.

My note: The simulations described in this post do not reflect a current or predicted situation in Ukraine. To stay updated on the current situation at nuclear power plants in Ukraine and across the world, visit the website of the International Atomic Energy Agency at https://www.iaea.org/. Thanks, Z.S.