This report covers recent parliamentary questions submitted by Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) concerning energy, climate, and industrial policy and answers to previous PQs by the Commission. These documents were published between 10 and 16 November 2025. The key themes addressed include the deployment of renewable energy sources like solar and hydropower, the development of energy infrastructure for hydrogen and electricity grids, and the financial and regulatory frameworks governing the green transition. Significant attention is given to carbon pricing mechanisms such as the EU Emissions Trading System (ETS2) and the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM), alongside the role of EU funds like the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF) and the Social Climate Fund. Further topics include industrial competitiveness, supply chain security for critical raw materials, and overarching governance of the European Green Deal. In total, this report summarises 30 parliamentary questions, of which 11 have been answered by the European Commission and 19 are awaiting a response.
❗Floating solar parks: green dream or environmental disaster in the making?
Following an incident where a floating solar park caught fire off the Dutch coast, MEP Sander Smit (PPE) enquired on 3 October 2025 about the safety and environmental risks of such installations. In P-003901/25, he asked if the Commission would consider a moratorium on new projects based on the precautionary principle. In a response on 12 November 2025, Commissioner Kadis clarified that while the precautionary principle is a cornerstone of EU policy, imposing moratoria falls under national competence unless EU law is clearly breached. The Commission promotes innovative renewables, including floating solar, through the Renewable Energy Directive and encourages research into their environmental impacts, but will not impose a ban, instead highlighting tools like Maritime Spatial Planning to ensure sustainable deployment.
❗Agrivoltaics and land use
In response to a question regarding the environmental impact of photovoltaic (PV) plants on fertile land, the Commission addressed the balance between renewable energy production and other public interests. In his answer of 11 November 2025 to E-003275/25, Commissioner Jørgensen stated that under the Environmental Impact Assessment Directive, national authorities are responsible for determining if an assessment is necessary for PV projects. He noted the Commission’s work towards an EU observatory on farmland to help Member States make informed decisions on land use and highlighted that EU legislation encourages local community participation and benefit-sharing in renewable projects. The Commission has also issued guidance to promote innovative forms of deployment, such as agrivoltaics.
❓Implementation of Article 10 of Directive (EU) 2024/1275 on the energy performance of buildings
MEP Yannis Maniatis (S&D) submitted E-004373/2025 on 5 November 2025, raising concerns that the implementation of the Energy Performance of Buildings Directive could lead to a biased promotion of photovoltaic systems over more efficient solar thermal systems. The question highlights the advantages of solar thermal technology, including its EU-based manufacturing and lesser strain on electricity grids, and asks what measures the Commission will take to ensure technological neutrality and how it will implement the provision requiring Member States to consider electricity network stability. A response from the Commission is pending.
❓Mesochora hydroelectric project
In E-004281/2025, submitted on 31 October 2025, MEP Yannis Maniatis (S&D) questioned the Commission about the delayed commissioning of the Mesochora hydroelectric power plant in Greece, which was completed in 2001. Despite its inclusion in Greece’s 2024 National Energy and Climate Plan (NECP) for immediate commissioning, no action has been taken. The MEP asks if the project’s completion was discussed during the NECP drafting and in the context of the European Semester, and whether Greece has requested any EU funding or technical assistance for the project. A response from the Commission is pending.
Hydrogen & Power-to-X
❓Meeting future hydrogen demand in Greece and the EU
MEP Sakis Arnaoutoglou (S&D) on 30 October 2025 raised concerns about Greece’s projected hydrogen deficit and higher-than-average prices, as noted by the European Network of Transmission System Operators for Gas. E-004277/2025 asks how the Commission plans to support Member States at risk of a hydrogen deficit to ensure energy cohesion, whether it will establish specific funding or connectivity programmes to reduce price disparities, and if it will promote research and production of European electrolysis technology to boost competitiveness. A response from the Commission is pending.
Carbon Pricing & Social Impact (ETS2, CBAM)
❗Reassessing the timetable and safeguards for ETS2
A large cross-party group of MEPs led by Andrzej Halicki (PPE) submitted E-003032/25 on 22 July 2025, expressing concerns that the new Emissions Trading System for buildings and road transport (ETS2) could increase costs by 30-40% by 2030. They asked about extending the price cap mechanism beyond 2030, reforming the Market Stability Reserve, and ensuring the Social Climate Fund (SCF) resources are available in advance. In his reply on 12 November 2025, Commissioner Hoekstra stated that the Commission takes price concerns seriously but considers high price forecasts unrealistic as they often ignore complementary national policies. He confirmed the SCF will start in 2026, a year before ETS2, financed by ETS1 allowances to enable early national support measures.
❗Social Climate Fund implementation
In response to a question regarding the submission of Social Climate Plans (SCPs), which are intended to shield vulnerable households from the costs of the ETS2, the Commission provided an update on the process. In his answer of 11 November 2025 to E-003889/25, Commissioner Hoekstra confirmed that by the recommended deadline of 30 June 2025, only Sweden had submitted its plan, followed by Latvia in July. However, he noted that most Member States have submitted draft plans which are under review, and the Commission is actively engaged in bilateral and horizontal meetings, providing extensive guidance to assist them in preparing and submitting their final plans before the ETS2 starts in 2027.
❗Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) extension
The Commission was asked about the potential extension of the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) to downstream goods. In a reply on 11 November 2025 to question E-003621/25, Commissioner Hoekstra confirmed that input from a recent public consultation will feed into a proposal to extend the scope to steel and aluminium-intensive downstream goods. He noted that the Commission assesses carbon leakage risk, emissions relevance, and technical feasibility for any extension. Furthermore, the Commission intends to table a proposal by the end of 2025 to use CBAM revenues to support production at risk of carbon leakage.
❓ETS 2 – Impact on energy prices and households
MEP Daniel Obajtek (ECR) submitted E-004154/2025 on 22 October 2025, raising concerns about the social and economic impact of the upcoming ETS2 in lower-income Member States like Poland. The question asks if the Commission has analysed the impact on energy and fuel prices in these countries, how it plans to protect households from rising living costs, and whether it would consider replacing the mechanism with alternative instruments focused on investment in energy modernisation and low-emission transport. A response from the Commission is pending.
❓Impact of ETS and CBAM on the fertiliser industry
On 6 November 2025, MEP Maria Grapini (S&D) asked the Commission about the impact of the ETS and CBAM on the competitiveness of the EU’s fertiliser industry. E-004383/2025 suggests that the phase-out of free allocations by 2034 risks relocating production outside the EU. The question proposes postponing the start of the phase-out from 2026 to 2030 and linking its trajectory to the availability of feasible decarbonisation technologies like e-ammonia and low-emission hydrogen. A response from the Commission is pending.
❓Nitrogen and urea prices and CBAM rules: mitigating the impact on farmers
A group of MEPs from the ECR group, led by Daniele Polato, submitted E-004386/2025 on 6 November 2025, expressing concern that the CBAM rules will increase the price of nitrogen-based products, including agricultural urea, thereby affecting crop prices and food costs. They ask if the Commission has estimated the impact on the agricultural sector, whether any transitional measures are planned to mitigate price increases, and what solutions are envisaged to prevent further price hikes in the European market. A response from the Commission is pending.
EU Funding & Public Investment
❗Use of RRF funds for the European Defence Industry Programme (EDIP)
In response to a question about the flexibility of the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF), the Commission addressed the possibility of using these funds for defence. In his answer of 10 November 2025 to E-003796/25, Commissioner Dombrovskis confirmed that the Commission has encouraged co-legislators to allow voluntary national contributions from the RRF to the future European Defence Industry Programme (EDIP). This would be considered an investment under the RRF, consistent with its objective of increasing the EU’s crisis preparedness, with supported projects to be identified through EDIP’s governance structure and achieved by the RRF’s deadline of 31 August 2026.
❗Audit arrangements for Italy’s RRF plan
The Commission was questioned about a reform in Italy that could affect the auditing of funds from the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF). In a reply on 10 November 2025 to E-002902/25, Commissioner Serafin clarified that Member States are primarily responsible for protecting the EU’s financial interests. He stated that the Commission will assess the compatibility of Italy’s reform with RRF regulations once the bill is adopted. If the revised audit arrangements are deemed inadequate, the Commission could downgrade the rating of Italy’s RRF Plan, which would halt payments until the deficiencies are addressed.
❗Application of the Do-No-Significant-Harm (DNSH) principle to national funds
A group of MEPs from The Left, led by Dario Tamburrano, asked about the construction of two incinerators in Sicily funded by Italy’s National Plan for Complementary Investments to the NRRP. E-003834/25, submitted on 1 October 2025, questioned if the Do-No-Significant-Harm (DNSH) principle applies to such national complementary funds. In his response on 14 November 2025, Commissioner Dombrovskis clarified that the DNSH principle applies to the Recovery and Resilience Facility itself but not to projects funded through national resources, including the National Complementary Fund. He stressed that Member States are responsible for ensuring such projects comply with Union and national law.
❗Regional Emergency Support to Reconstruction (RESTORE)
In response to a question on the use of the Regional Emergency Support to Reconstruction (RESTORE) mechanism, the Commission provided an update on its deployment. In his answer of 13 November 2025 to P-004151/25, Executive Vice-President Fitto explained that RESTORE allows Member States affected by climate-related disasters to redirect up to 10% of their 2021-2027 ERDF and ESF+ funds for recovery. To date, five Member States (Spain, France, Italy, Poland, and Romania) have reallocated EUR 1.8 billion to RESTORE, with an additional EUR 120 million in the pipeline, funding repairs to water, transport, and energy infrastructure as well as healthcare and education facilities.
❓Need for a European Island Fund
MEP Fredis Beleris (PPE) submitted E-004245/2025 on 29 October 2025, advocating for the creation of a dedicated European Island Fund to address the permanent natural disadvantages faced by island regions, as recognised in Article 174 TFEU. The question argues that without a specific financial instrument, the upcoming European strategy for islands risks remaining theoretical. It asks if the Commission will consider creating such a fund as part of the next MFF (2028-2034) and how it will ensure support for small islands or those with dual insularity. A response from the Commission is pending.
❓Electronic mobility in rural areas
On 4 November 2025, MEP Alexander Jungbluth (ESN) questioned the use of European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) co-financing for an “Electronic Mobility in Rural Areas” project in Rhineland-Palatinate, Germany. E-004326/2025 asks for the Commission’s view on the value of the funding relative to its infrastructure benefits, what reliable information exists on the project’s real-world impact on mobility behaviour, and how the Commission ensures ERDF funds are not primarily used for symbolic measures with no measurable impact. A response from the Commission is pending.
❗Just Transition Mechanism in Romania
In response to a question concerning the EU’s 2050 climate neutrality target, the Commission outlined the support available for Member States transitioning away from fossil fuels. In his answer of 10 November 2025 to E-003517/25, Commissioner Jørgensen highlighted that Member States are responsible for defining their transition pathways in their National Energy and Climate Plans. He specified that Romania is the third-largest beneficiary of the Just Transition Fund, receiving over EUR 2.1 billion, and has access to almost EUR 31 billion under EU cohesion policy and further support from the Modernisation Fund to address development and energy transition challenges.
❓Consequences of possible non-compliance with the Effort Sharing 2030 targets
MEP Luděk Niedermayer (PPE) asked the Commission on 31 October 2025 for clarity on how it will manage non-compliance with the Effort Sharing 2030 targets. E-004285/2025 seeks to understand the steps and timing of actions if a Member State fails to meet its targets, even after a corrective action plan has been issued. The question also probes whether the Commission would consider introducing financial penalties or pricing for excess emissions for non-compliant countries. A response from the Commission is pending.
❓Deregulatory drift and weakening of the European Green Deal
MEP César Luena (S&D) on 31 October 2025 raised concerns that the Commission’s ‘simplification’ agenda is a form of progressive deregulation that puts European Green Deal objectives at risk. E-004283/2025 points to the reopening of the deforestation regulation and proposed cuts to environmental programmes in the new MFF as evidence. The MEP asks how the Commission justifies these decisions while claiming to stay the course on the Green Deal and why it does not introduce an environmental non-regression clause in future legislative and financial instruments. A response from the Commission is pending.
❓Revision of the public procurement directives
On 6 November 2025, MEP Morten Løkkegaard (Renew) submitted E-004390/2025, arguing that a lack of flexibility in EU public procurement rules causes significant delays and cost increases for critical infrastructure projects, thereby hampering the EU’s climate ambitions. The question asks if the Commission acknowledges this issue and if it plans to propose amendments in its 2026 revision of the Procurement Directive to allow for proportionate project changes without requiring a full re-tendering process. A response from the Commission is pending.
❓Application of the Empowering Consumers for the Green Transition Directive
MEP Arba Kokalari (PPE) raised concerns on 6 November 2025 about the upcoming application of the Empowering Consumers for the Green Transition Directive. According to E-004392/2025, an interpretation by DG JUST suggests the Directive will apply to products already on the market before its entry into force in September 2026. This could force companies to withdraw or destroy goods, creating unnecessary waste and costs. The question asks if the Commission will allow this interpretation to stand and whether it will consider a grandfathering clause or other guidance to prevent retroactive application. A response from the Commission is pending.
❓Including defence aspects in the EU’s nationally determined contributions
MEP Martin Günther (The Left) submitted E-004403/2025 on 7 November 2025, highlighting the under-reporting of military greenhouse gas emissions in UNFCCC national inventories. Citing the EU’s 2022 climate change and defence roadmap, which commits to including defence aspects in Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs), the question asks what specific steps have been taken to implement this and whether the Commission accepts that an “EU military emissions gap” exists between reported and actual emissions. A response from the Commission is pending.
❓Executive Vice-President Teresa Ribera’s declaration of interests
A group of PPE MEPs led by Alma Ezcurra Almansa submitted E-004286/2025 on 31 October 2025, questioning the compatibility of Executive Vice-President Teresa Ribera’s role as Co-Chair of the IEA’s Global Commission on People-Centred Clean Energy Transitions with her duties as a Commissioner. The question notes that her declaration of interests stated her work with the IEA ended in November 2024, yet she is still listed as Co-Chair. It asks for clarification on her current status and whether holding both positions simultaneously is permissible under EU rules on incompatibilities. A response from the Commission is pending.
❗Safeguards for industries linked to critical raw materials
In response to a question on the suspension of silicon metal production in Europe, the Commission outlined its ongoing actions to protect strategic industries. In his answer of 13 November 2025 to P-003550/25, Executive Vice-President Séjourné confirmed that a safeguard investigation concerning certain alloying elements, including silicon, is in its final stage. He also noted that the Commission monitors industrial capacities under the EU Critical Raw Materials Act and supports industry through measures in the Clean Industrial Deal, including a new EUR 500 million EIB pilot programme for corporate Power Purchase Agreements and a EUR 1.5 billion EIB grids manufacturing package.
❓Suspension of silicon metal production in Europe
A large group of MEPs, primarily from the PfE and ECR groups, submitted E-004312/2025 on 4 November 2025 regarding the suspension of silicon metal production by Ferroglobe in Europe, which has impacted 450 French employees. The question notes that while silicon is a strategic raw material, the current framework lacks specific safeguards for industrial plants facing asymmetric global competition. It asks if the Commission is considering emergency measures, including trade defence, mobilisation of the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund, or adapting state aid rules for targeted support. A response from the Commission is pending.
❓Effects of new EU proposal on steel processing industry
On 4 November 2025, a group of MEPs led by Julie Rechagneux (PfE) raised concerns about a proposed regulation (2025/0726 (COD)) aimed at addressing global overcapacity in the steel market. E-004313/2025 argues that by focusing on raw materials and semi-finished products, the measures could harm the downstream processing sector by driving up costs and encouraging imports of finished products. The question asks if the Commission will include finished steel products in the proposal, if the CBAM’s extension will be accompanied by support for processors, and if measures to stimulate demand are planned. A response from the Commission is pending.
❓Ethanol imports from Pakistan
MEP Salvatore De Meo (PPE) submitted E-004388/2025 on 6 November 2025, questioning the effectiveness of Implementing Regulation (EU) 2025/1206, which reintroduced customs duties on non-fuel ethanol imports from Pakistan. The MEP notes that despite the measure, imports have not fallen substantially. The question asks if the Commission is aware of the import quantities, what surveillance measures are in place to prevent misclassification of ethanol, and whether further corrective steps are needed to ensure the GSP+ measures are effective and prevent market distortions. A response from the Commission is pending.
❓The dependence of Member States’ defence industries on imports of critical raw materials
MEP Michał Dworczyk (ECR) on 4 November 2025 questioned the coherence of the EU’s strategy for strategic autonomy in the defence industry. E-004320/2025 points out the contradiction between aiming for self-sufficiency while remaining dependent on critical raw materials, particularly rare earth elements controlled by China. The question asks what specific measures the Commission is taking to end this dependence and diversify supply sources, and whether it plans to strengthen strategic partnerships with resource-rich countries like Canada, Australia, and Kazakhstan. A response from the Commission is pending.
❓Flags of convenience for the Russian shadow fleet
On 17 October 2025, MEPs Jonas Sjöstedt and Hanna Gedin (The Left) submitted E-004107/2025 concerning the use of flags of convenience by the Russian shadow fleet, which transports oil on often uninsured and unsafe vessels. The question highlights the role of countries like Panama, Barbados, Gabon, and Guinea in enabling these activities despite EU sanctions. It asks for the Commission’s view on these countries, whether it intends to take action such as targeted sanctions against them, and who would be held responsible for the costs of potential environmental disasters. A response from the Commission is pending.
