How Poland could avoid building up to 20 GW of gas capacity
By Kuba Gogolewski (Program Director, Mission Possible) and Juliet Phillips (Power Sector Campaign Coordinator, Beyond Fossil Fuels)
As Europe grapples with yet another price shock in the fossil fuel markets, the dangers of relying on imported oil and gas have once again become impossible to ignore. The European Commission itself openly admits that the only path to permanent energy security is to transition away from volatile fossil fuels and ramp up investment in domestic, clean energy. This is the bedrock of a more electrified, resilient, and affordable economy.
Yet, many European governments continue to push forward with plans to expand their fleets of gas-fired power plants, risking decades of carbon lock-in and exposure to future price spikes. Analyses by Beyond Fossil Fuels reveal that European countries are currently planning to build nearly 100 GW of new gas capacity.
The “Baseload Gas” Myth
This push is driven by a widespread, flawed assumption: that gas-fired power plants are the only viable way to ensure grid stability and meet rising electricity demand. Unsurprisingly, this narrative is heavily promoted by the fossil fuel and nuclear industries, which benefit from inflated projections of future power demand. This view is further entrenched by the models and analyses produced by national transmission system operators (TSOs), regulators, and government agencies. These very forecasts are then used to design support mechanisms, such as capacity markets, which in at least six European countries have heavily subsidized gas plants.
What makes this particularly alarming is that many of these new gas plants are being designed to run continuously as baseload power sources. In Poland, this would effectively mean replacing coal plants with gas plants, in turn squeezing out cheaper renewable energy from the grid.
But what if these models carry an inherent bias in favor of large, centralized power sources? What if they are locking us into building far more gas and nuclear infrastructure than our societies and economies actually need – while a more secure, decentralized alternative is entirely within reach?
Redefining Poland’s Energy Trajectory
A new study by Dr. Krzysztof Bodzek of the Silesian University of Technology reveals that Poland could avoid investing in up to 20.8 GW of gas capacity by 2040 compared to a “business-as-usual” scenario.
For this to happen, Poland must properly develop:
- Local renewable energy sources (RES)
- Battery and utility-scale energy storage
- Demand-side flexibility (DSR)
- Localized grid balancing
Under this scenario, a massive share of future demand would be generated and consumed locally, bypassing the need for heavy investments in massive gas or nuclear plants.
The study highlights that the perceived “gas-versus-nuclear” binary choice is a product of data gaps in the models used by the Polish grid operator (PSE), the government, and the Energy Market Agency (ARE).
The Self-Consumption Blind Spot
The primary flaw in these models is the near-total exclusion of Poland’s rapid rise in energy self-consumption – where electricity (mainly solar PV) is generated and consumed directly on-site by households, public institutions, and businesses.
Between 2021 and 2025, Poland’s prosumer base grew from 850,000 to 1.61 million, while estimated self-consumption rose from 0.9 TWh to 3.1 TWh. Yet, neither this current volume nor its projected growth is adequately factored into national energy planning models.
Decoupling Growth from Power Demand
The study also challenges the assumption that GDP growth translates directly into a one-to-one increase in electricity demand. Over the past three decades, Poland’s GDP has grown significantly faster than its power consumption. Since 2021, the link between GDP growth and grid-level electricity consumption has weakened even further. We can no longer mechanically project future demand based purely on economic growth and historical trends.
For example, PSE’s model assumes a massive spike in national power consumption – by as much as 11 TWh in 2026 – which lacks any realistic foundation.
The single greatest planning risk today is overestimating how much electricity large, centralized power stations actually need to supply. If self-consumption and local balancing are ignored, it will lead to massive over-investment in centralized generation and transmission lines. This doesn’t just oversaturate the grid; it creates expensive, underutilized infrastructure that carries a high risk of becoming stranded assets.
A Better Path Forward
According to Beyond Fossil Fuels, Poland has options. The country currently has about 5 GW of gas capacity and plans to build another 11.5 GW.
These findings should prompt a fundamental rethink of the capacity market, which has been redesigned by the government and grid operator to favor expensive gas plants over energy storage.
We need a fresh approach to how the Polish power grid is planned and operated. Improving the national energy balance relies not only on building new generation, but on reducing grid losses and the energy sector’s own internal consumption. We must also make better use of rapidly expanding solar generation by accelerating the electrification of heating and transport, targeting areas where renewable curtailment is highest.
This is not just a Polish issue. Across Europe, planning and investment frameworks must pivot away from high-risk fossil gas and toward renewables, system flexibility, and grid modernization. This aligns with recommendations from the European Commission, which urges member states to draft energy community strategies that include clear estimates of local self-consumption potential for 2030 and 2040.
The current geopolitical crisis, compounded by the conflict surrounding Iran, is a stark reminder that time is running out. Europe’s economic and energy security depends on permanently breaking its fossil fuel dependency. The good news is that a more secure energy future for Poland is entirely possible – one where millions of households run on cheaper, locally produced clean energy.
The responsibility now lies with European energy ministers, TSOs, and regulators to ensure that grid development plans do not saddle taxpayers with giant, unnecessary investments in overcapacity.