According to press reports, the rules cover inverters, which convert the DC electricity generated by solar panels to the AC of the grid, as well as power conversion systems used in BESS. The rules have been imposed on equipment from China, Iran, North Korea and Russia, according to reports, and are based on cybersecurity fears. The plan was initially communicated to banks in early May. However, EU authorities have published little since then.

In July, solar power trade association SolarPower Europe complained that the plans have generated ‘deep uncertainty’ in the sector and called on authorities to publish guidance and impact assessments, harmonise codes and support European manufacturers to scale up production in compensation.

It said: ‘The absence of written information on the justification and scope of the decision is already delaying solar projects across Europe – putting the EU’s 2030 renewable energy goals at risk – while at the same time hindering the sector’s ability to adapt to the [European] Commission’s decision. The absence of prior consultation or an impact assessment is also a concern for the sector and is not consistent with the Commission’s own good governance principles. Without understanding the Commission’s reasoning, investors cannot make informed decisions about projects, investments, procurement or financing structures.’

But the trade body went on to say its complaints do not mean it was against the plans. ‘Industrial policy and cybersecurity are priorities for SolarPower Europe which require distinct and tailored approaches. We have a track-record of concrete proposals on strengthening cybersecurity and are supporting strong and strict made-in-Europe provisions for reshoring manufacturing.’

In the absence of official impact assessments, analyst Wood Mackenzie has conducted its own analysis, which estimates that more than 28GW (DC) of capacity will be affected, amounting to 14% of forecast European solar photovoltaic (PV) demand, and 12% of energy storage demand, between 2026–2030. However, 80% of funding of these projects comes from either private or national government funding, it said.

Both Wood Mackenzie and SolarPower Europe said that central and eastern European projects would be most affected, as they are the ones that receive the most public support.

The Wood Mackenzie analysis goes on to say that the impact will spread more widely, as EU funding is also used for international projects. And it could be greater within the EU if member states adopt the rule for solar and battery storage projects supported with national funds, as the EU is requesting.

Wood Mackenzie suggests that replacing the inverters with domestic alternatives will raise prices by about 10%. That’s not all, as the rules will also require unbundling of integrated battery and inverter technologies.

Juan Monge, Principal Analyst at Wood Mackenzie, said: ‘The real questions now are how the Commission will update the EU Cybersecurity Act to treat solar inverters as critical infrastructure and whether EU member states will follow the Commission’s lead and extend these restrictions to their own national funding programmes. If they do, the scale of disruption changes considerably.’