ANRE's 30 EUR/kW guarantee: discipline without blocking bankable renewable projects

Romania's renewable energy market is entering a more disciplined phase. After years in which grid capacity became the decisive asset in many projects, the regulator is looking for ways to separate serious development from speculative reservation of network capacity.

That objective is legitimate. Grid capacity should not be blocked by projects that exist only in a data room, with no realistic path to permitting, financing or construction.

The difficult question is how to clean the market without making real projects less bankable.

The measure that changes the discussion

ANRE's draft amendment to Regulation 6/2025 on licences and establishment authorizations proposes a financial guarantee of 30 EUR/kW installed capacity. The guarantee would be maintained until the grid connection certificate is issued and would be payable at ANRE's first demand.

In economic terms, this is not a marginal filing requirement. It is a material capital item. It can consume bank lines, require collateral, increase guarantee fees or block cash at a stage when the project may still depend on permitting, grid works, financing and technical approvals.

That is why the measure should be assessed not only as a regulatory tool, but also as a bankability event.

Why proportionality matters

The stated target is speculative behaviour. The proposed drafting, however, risks capturing more than that. A project may be delayed because of grid-operator works, public authority timing, environmental procedures, litigation, land corrections, supply chain constraints or changes requested during technical review.

Those situations are very different from abandonment or inactivity. A regulation that treats them in the same way can turn development complexity into a financial sanction.

In our view, the legal test should be simple: a serious developer should be required to demonstrate progress; a speculative developer should lose the privilege of blocking capacity. The guarantee mechanism should be designed around that distinction.

Installed capacity is not always the right base

The draft refers to installed capacity. In many projects, that may overstate the real pressure placed on the grid.

For photovoltaic projects, DC oversizing can make installed capacity higher than the export capacity approved for the grid. For BESS projects, the distinction between MW and MWh matters. For hybrid PV + BESS projects, production and storage may use the same approved export capacity and should not be double-counted.

If the policy goal is to prevent occupation of scarce network capacity, the more precise reference point is the approved export capacity, not installed capacity in the abstract.

Bankability and M&A consequences

The proposed guarantee will not remain an ANRE-only issue. It will enter legal due diligence, financial models and transaction documents.

Developers, investors and lenders will need to review:

• the amount and form of the guarantee;
• whether it is transferable or must be replaced after an acquisition;
• how long it remains in place;
• whether delays are attributable to the project company or to third parties;
• whether the project can realistically reach the grid connection certificate within the authorization term;
• whether price retentions, indemnities or conditions precedent are needed in M&A documents.

For RTB transactions, this may change pricing. A project with an ATR, building permit and connection agreement may still carry a new layer of regulatory exposure if the establishment authorization, guarantee and grid connection certificate timeline are not aligned.

BESS and hybrid projects need specific treatment

Battery storage is not only another generation technology. A standalone BESS project depends on revenue stacking, balancing-market access, aggregation, tolling or optimization arrangements, cycling assumptions and technical qualification. Hybrid projects add further questions about export capacity, charging logic and the interaction between generation and storage.

If the guarantee applies mechanically, BESS and hybrid projects may be penalized precisely when Romania needs flexibility to integrate more renewable generation. The regulation should expressly avoid double counting and should calculate exposure by reference to the capacity that is actually reserved or used in the network.

A better regulatory architecture

The reform does not need to be abandoned. It needs to be calibrated.

A more balanced mechanism would include:

• calculation by reference to approved export capacity;
• specific rules for PV, BESS and hybrid projects;
• partial release of guarantees when meaningful milestones are achieved;
• execution only where delay or failure is attributable to the authorization holder;
• prior notice, a cure period and a reasoned ANRE decision before execution;
• protection for delays caused by grid operators, authorities, litigation or objective permitting constraints;
• a transitional regime for projects already structured under the existing framework;
• standard guarantee templates accepted by ANRE, banks, IFNs and insurers.

This approach would still discourage speculative projects, but it would not punish developers who can demonstrate serious progress.

The European direction is acceleration, not capital deadlock

European policy is moving toward faster permitting and accelerated deployment of renewable energy. That direction does not prevent Member States from cleaning their grid queues. It does, however, require regulatory tools to remain proportionate.

Romania needs both discipline and speed. The grid queue should be cleaner, but the investment environment should also remain competitive, financeable and open to developers beyond only the largest balance sheets.

What market participants should do now

Developers and investors should review their Romanian portfolios project by project. The key questions are practical:

• What is the installed capacity and what is the approved export capacity?
• Would the guarantee be calculated on a number that reflects real grid impact?
• Can the project show documented progress through land, permitting, EPC, financing or works?
• Are delays within the developer's control or caused by third parties?
• Would the guarantee affect existing M&A pricing or financing assumptions?

For lenders, the question is no longer only whether the project has an ATR and an establishment authorization. It is whether those rights can survive the full path to the grid connection certificate.

Conclusion

ANRE is right to address speculative projects. Romania cannot build a modern renewable energy system if network capacity is occupied by projects with no credible implementation path.

But the proposed 30 EUR/kW guarantee should not become a blunt capital filter. If it is calculated too broadly, maintained too long and executed without a fault analysis, it may reduce competition, raise financing costs and slow down exactly the projects Romania needs: real PV, wind, BESS and hybrid investments that can reach commercial operation.

The better answer is not over-guaranteeing. It is maturity, documented progress and proportionate responsibility.

Frequently asked questions

Is the 30 EUR/kW guarantee already in force?

No. It is part of a draft ANRE amendment submitted for public consultation. Market participants should nevertheless assess the potential impact now.

Why is approved export capacity important?

Because the policy issue is the reservation of grid capacity. Installed capacity may not always reflect the actual capacity exported to the network, especially in PV, BESS and hybrid projects.

Who should review this risk?

Developers, project sellers, buyers, lenders and investors involved in Romanian renewable energy, storage and hybrid projects should review guarantee exposure, authorization deadlines and grid connection certificate timing.