‘Europe could cut billions in infrastructure costs’ claim

A new study suggests that promoting open, cross-sector infrastructure modelling can save Europe up to €750 billion by 2050 by optimising investments in electricity, hydrogen, and gas networks, reshaping policy and governance approaches.

Europe could substantially reduce the cost of its transition to climate neutrality by replacing siloed, national infrastructure planning with open, co‑optimised, cross‑sector modelling, according to a new integrated planning analysis. The modelling , produced for Agora Energiewende by Fraunhofer IEG, Fraunhofer ISI and d‑fine , finds that optimising investments across electricity, hydrogen, fossil gas and CO₂ networks across 62 regional clusters could cut system costs by more than €560 billion between 2030 and 2050, rising to about €750 billion when avoided back‑up generation needs are included. ^{[1][2][3][4][5]}

The study’s central methodological innovation is a co‑optimisation model that simultaneously accounts for interactions between renewable siting, grid expansion, storage deployment and industrial hydrogen demand. That integrated approach exposes system‑level efficiencies that conventional, sector‑isolated studies miss, notably lower requirements for reserve capacity and for certain supply assets. The model finds roughly 505 GW less backup capacity is needed, 15% less onshore wind and about 9% fewer electrolysers in a high‑integration scenario than in fragmented planning frameworks. ^[1][4]

Electricity network expansion emerges as the dominant infrastructure priority to 2050. The report shows that stronger electrification of transport, heat and industry requires significant grid development, reinforcing the EU policy emphasis on electrification embedded in recent packages and strategies. By contrast, the analysis indicates that wide‑area fossil gas pipelines decline in importance and that hydrogen and CO₂ transport infrastructure are needed mainly in targeted industrial clusters rather than as an extensive continental backbone. This assessment differs from several national hydrogen strategies that plan transport infrastructure at much larger scales than the model supports. ^[1][7]

Integrated planning also reshapes investment timing and capital expenditure profiles. When renewables are sited more efficiently and sector coupling is coordinated, technology and infrastructure CAPEX fall substantially in the integrated scenarios, while greater autonomy in national planning increases total system costs. These findings align with earlier warnings from regulatory bodies about the financial risks of uncoordinated grid development and suggest coordinated siting and sequencing can lower upfront and lifecycle costs. ^[1][2][7]

A governance deficit underpins many of the inefficiencies the study highlights. Current European planning arrangements lack a single, transparent, top‑down modelling benchmark against which national plans can be assessed; electricity and gas TSOs still model largely separately and cross‑sector consistency checks are limited. The report recommends creation or designation of an independent entity to perform open‑source, co‑optimised modelling at EU level , options include the European Commission, the Joint Research Centre, or a new independent system operator , and argues a high‑level continental vision should guide national network development plans. ^[1][4]

The practical consequences are specific. The report finds current hydrogen pipeline proposals exceed modelled needs by roughly a factor of 2.5, suggesting political momentum for hydrogen transport infrastructure is outpacing evidence‑based needs. Conversely, electricity grid projects appear under‑prioritised relative to integrated system requirements. The study therefore calls for new cost‑allocation frameworks to compensate countries bearing higher investment burdens in priority cross‑border corridors and to ensure timely delivery of strategically important projects. ^[1][4]

The study’s conclusions sit alongside parallel efforts to improve interlinked, multisector modelling. Recent work by ENTSO‑E and ENTSOG on an Interlinked Modelling Framework, developed with ENNOH, points in a similar direction by enabling more cohesive assessment of electricity, gas and hydrogen interactions for Ten‑Year Network Development Plans; these complementary initiatives indicate growing institutional momentum for the kind of cross‑sector planning the report advocates. ^[6]

Taken together, the analysis argues that Europe’s ability to deliver a secure, competitive and climate‑neutral energy system depends as much on the architecture of infrastructure planning as on technology deployment rates. Prioritising electricity grids, tailoring hydrogen and CO₂ networks to industrial clusters, implementing EU‑level open modelling and reforming cross‑border cost‑sharing mechanisms are presented as essential steps to realise the quantified savings and avoid lock‑in that fragmented planning risks. ^{[1][2][3][4][5][7]}

📌 Reference Map:

##Reference Map:

• ^[1] (Energy News / Agora report summary) – Paragraph 1, Paragraph 2, Paragraph 3, Paragraph 4, Paragraph 5, Paragraph 6, Paragraph 8
• ^[2] (Agora Energiewende news) – Paragraph 1, Paragraph 4, Paragraph 8
• ^[3] (d‑fine news) – Paragraph 1, Paragraph 8
• ^[4] (Fraunhofer report, 8 Oct 2025 / November 2025 updates) – Paragraph 2, Paragraph 5, Paragraph 6, Paragraph 8
• ^[5] (Bayern Innovativ summary) – Paragraph 1, Paragraph 8
• ^[6] (ENTSO‑E / ENTSOG interlinked modelling report) – Paragraph 7
• ^[7] (Agora Energiewende longer publication) – Paragraph 3, Paragraph 4, Paragraph 8

Source: Fuse Wire Services