Schlein’s energy programme is not entirely convincing

In Thursday’s interview with Il Foglio, Elly Schlein outlined her energy policy programme, which can be summarised in two key points. Firstly: to expand renewable energy capacity by streamlining authorisation procedures and stipulating that ‘wherever there is a power plant, a proportion of the energy produced must be allocated to small and medium-sized enterprises and households, with discounts on their energy bills’. Second: to reform, but not suspend, the ETS (Emissions Trading System).

The reference model, which has been cited on several occasions, is Spain. However, the share of renewables in the two countries is not very different: in June 2026, for example, they accounted for 54.5 per cent of electricity generation in Italy, compared with 58.4 per cent in Spain. Yet the prices were radically different: 132.5 euro/MWh compared with 69.6 euro/MWh. A key difference lies in nuclear power (18.3 per cent in Spain in June), which significantly reduces gas consumption. The PD secretary is right to say that implementation times in Italy would be lengthy: this does not detract from the importance of that ‘base’ of production at low marginal costs, without which Spanish prices would be inexplicable. Nor should we underestimate the fact that Spain has stronger winds and that the terrain is more favourable to large-scale solar power plants (which are largely banned in Italy under the Agriculture Decree, without the PD having opposed this with any particular vehemence).

In any case, Italian energy prices on the exchange will fall as the share of renewables increases. Schlein is right to call for simplifications (“In Spain, authorisation processes take two years. In Italy, six years. Failure, from this point of view, is not a foregone conclusion: it is a choice”). But she sidesteps Claudio Cerasa’s question about the “Sardinia model”: the region, which has a centre-left administration led by Alessandra Todde, has excluded over 99 per cent of its territory from suitable areas and has lashed out against the “speculation” of renewable energy “multinationals”. Schlein accuses Giorgia Meloni of inaction, but in recent years the rate of installation of renewable energy sources has risen from around 1 GW per year to around 7 GW per year. In the first half of 2026 alone, 3.1 GW of solar power and 0.3 GW of wind power were added.

Of course, there are various reasons for this, many of which are beyond the government’s control. But, in part, it is also the result of the government’s challenges to centre-left regional laws opposing renewable energy (just last Thursday, the Constitutional Court once again struck down Sardinia’s law on unsuitable areas: this is the third time in two years for the Todde administration). There is little that can be simplified if the political will is lacking. Offering residents some financial incentive would serve little purpose. Moreover, even today, those who build industrial plants (including renewable energy facilities) already pay territorial compensation; furthermore, assuming it were even possible, the additional cost would be passed on to all other consumers.

As for the ETS, it is unclear how Schlein would like to reform it: is she in favour, for example, of including waste-to-energy plants and maritime transport? What does she think of ETS 2, which will extend the scheme to fuels and buildings from 2028, adding 10–12 cents per litre to fuel prices and 4–5 cents per cubic metre to gas prices? Furthermore, the PD secretary would like to see a reduction in electricity taxes: which ones? How can she simultaneously call for a cut in electricity taxation and the abolition of environmentally harmful subsidies (SADs), including the exemption from excise duty on domestic energy consumption and the application of a reduced VAT rate? Why, when the government took steps to reduce the SADs – for example, by aligning excise duties on petrol and diesel – did the PD attack it rather than support it?

For Schlein, all questions have a single answer: renewables. The problem is that he tends to focus on low production costs, whilst overlooking the costs involved in integrating them into the electricity system. For example, the cost of producing solar power is very low, but the energy is only available when the sun is shining: to have it at night and in winter, we need storage, demand flexibility and more robust grids, the costs of which erode the initial advantage. Before promising unlikely accelerations, Schlein should explain how to overcome the internal resistance within her own party whenever the discussion shifts from general support for the transition to the assessment of specific projects within the Campo Largo circle.