How should Europe think about energy sovereignty post-Hormuz?

The closure of the Strait of Hormuz has put energy security back at the top of Europe’s agenda. But unlike in 2022, the EU is not starting from scratch. While it is better prepared, it hasn’t been protected.

Miccinilli, who is Senior Partner and Head of Energy & Climate at FleishmanHillard EU, describes a system that has become more resilient in recent years, without fundamentally reducing its exposure to global shocks.

“The EU is in a structurally stronger position—not because it has found a single way to shield itself, but because it has developed a broader toolbox of resilience mechanisms that now operate in parallel,” he says.

And that toolbox has been doing most of the heavy lifting.

For Miccinilli, who was formerly Director of Energy and Climate with the Centre on Regulation in Europe (CERRE), gas storage was a significant shift. Mandatory targets and tighter coordination between Member States turned it into a central pillar of security following 2022.

LNG followed a similar trajectory. What was initially a crisis response became embedded in the system, with US imports now a structural part of Europe’s supply mix. That reduced reliance on pipeline gas and improved flexibility—but it didn’t solve the volatility problem.

“This diversification has reduced dependence on pipeline gas and increased flexibility, even if it comes at a higher and more volatile price,” Miccinilli notes.

At the same time, lower gas demand—driven by policy measures and faster renewable deployment—has eased some pressure on the system. But the adjustment has not been uniform. Industry in particular, says Miccinilli, remains exposed.

Which is why the nature of the risk has shifted.

“The key challenge today is less about physical security of supply and more about affordability and economic impact,” he says.

Miccinilli explains how in 2022, governments stepped in with subsidies, price caps and tax measures to contain the fallout. This time, the question is whether they can—or will—do it again in a coordinated way.

“The question now is whether governments have the fiscal space and political appetite to deploy similar measures again, and how coordinated those responses will be across the EU.

“In short, the EU is better equipped than in 2022 to manage supply shocks, thanks to storage, LNG diversification, REPowerEU and national demand adjustments. But it is not insulated. 

“Its resilience now depends as much on internal policy choices—especially how Member States mitigate price impacts—as on the external evolution of the crisis.”

Energy sovereignty and electrification

Indeed, Europe’s energy resilience and sovereignty have been key points of concern since Iran closed the Strait of Hormuz and the ensuing energy crisis, with European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen last week emphasising the importance of energy independence. 

For Miccinilli, there are several concrete steps Europe needs to prioritise to achieve energy sovereignty, beyond managing its LNG strategically.

LNG will remain part of the continent’s energy mix for years to come, and moving toward more coordinated approaches, including joint purchasing mechanisms and more flexible contracting structures, will be key, he says. 

But the first priority, is that of electrification, which is being held back by infrastructure.

“Europe can only scale renewables, electrify industry, and reduce fossil fuel dependence if the network is fit for purpose,” he says.

“This makes the delivery of the EU’s grids package and broader electrification plan absolutely critical. The main bottleneck is no longer technology but permitting: without faster and more predictable permitting procedures for transmission and distribution infrastructure, projects will stall and sovereignty ambitions will remain theoretical.”

After electrification, it comes down to aligning investment frameworks with strategic technologies, such as batteries, CCS, nuclear and direct air carbon capture. 

Rather than being ‘marginal’, Miccinilli says that such technologies will be central to industrial decarbonisation and energy system stability. 

“The issue is less about identifying them and more about de-risking investment, providing long-term visibility, and ensuring that public and private capital can flow at the scale required.”

Additionally, says Miccinilli, it will be crucial for Europe to maintain and evolve its Emissions Trading System (ETS) to provide workable solutions for energy-intensive industries, which are ultimately exposed to both global competition and high energy costs.

A reminder of structural constraints

According to Miccinilli, the energy crisis should be seen as a reminder of structural constraints that have been hampering Europe’s net zero ambitions.

“There is often a narrative that crises can be ‘leveraged’ to accelerate localisation and reduce import dependence, but in this case, I would be more cautious. The real constraint in Europe today is not ambition to deploy more renewables. It is the system’s ability to absorb them.”

Indeed, grid bottlenecks have been coming up in some of Europe’s largest economies, including Germany and the Netherlands. And for Miccinilli, for Europe to step up renewable generation and electrify its economies, investment in these networks needs to keep pace.

“In practical terms, every euro invested in renewables should be matched by a euro invested in grids. Without that balance, the electrification wave will inevitably slow down, regardless of how strong the political push for localisation may be.

“Europe can reduce its reliance on imports over time, but only if it accelerates the rollout of both transmission and distribution grids in parallel with new generation.”

Notably, for Miccinilli, when asked on an order of investment priorities for energy systems and technologies, "grids come first.

“Batteries come second. Renewables are already cheap to develop but grids are of the essence for that. Nuclear energy is for long term planning but it is on the hands of Member States. 

“We are living in the age of energy additionality. I think this is undeniable and we cannot go cherry-picking anymore.”

Have you read?
Live blog: Europe's response to the energy crisis following the Middle East conflict
Energy crisis is resilience catalyst: Schneider’s Godemel
The overlooked grid factor shaping Europe’s energy security

Changing relationships and internal processes

This applies not only to technologies, but also to relationships. 

According to Miccinilli, the conflict in the Middle East has been reshaping Europe’s external energy relationships, particularly with the US, which Europe “needs for LNG, and this will remain for a while.

“Qatar may not become an option anytime soon for LNG or future hydrogen. Other regions will become more important for energy: perhaps Brazil for SAF. Norway is supporting the EU with all its energy possibilities and the Mediterranean will become a region to further explore electrification and hydrogen/ammonia options. 

“Europe will need to handle its dependence but make sure that all regions and partners can contribute to its structural needs for at least 20 years from now on.”

However, for Miccinilli, what’s also important to remember is what’s already in place. 

“The formula is, in many ways, straightforward: implement and enforce the legislation that is already in place,” he says, pointing to recent electricity market reforms, which provide the tools to stabilise prices, promote long-term contracts, and better integrate renewables.

“The priority now is execution—ensuring that these mechanisms are rolled out consistently and on time across Member States. ‘Quicker’ should not mean rushed or improvised; it should mean delivering as planned, without delays".

The Strait of Hormuz shock, then, is less a turning point than a stress test.

Europe has more tools than it did in 2022, but it is still operating within the same global system, with the same exposure to geopolitical risk and price volatility.

How it holds together this time will depend less on what happens externally and more on how it responds internally.