What the EU's 'Fitness Check' Says About Energy Security

The European Commission has released a comprehensive ‘fitness check’ assessing the resilience of EU energy systems and their readiness for potential crises.

The evaluation reviews EU legislative measures relating to energy security and electricity risk management between 2017 and 2024. It explores shifts in regional energy trends shaped by geopolitical developments, while analysing how effectively the EU safeguarded consumers during turbulent periods.

By drawing on these insights, the Commission aims to pinpoint the reforms necessary to fortify the EU’s energy security for the coming decade.

Defining energy security

EU energy policy rests on three central pillars: sustainability, affordability and energy security. The latter depends on maintaining long-term balance between supply and demand, as well as ensuring the capacity to withstand systemic shocks.

This stability is primarily supported by interconnected, efficiently functioning energy markets that allow energy to flow where it’s most needed based on transparent price signals. The Commissioner for Energy and Housing is currently reviewing the EU’s energy supply security framework to ensure it remains fit for the demands of the energy transition.

Energy security also ties closely to economic stability and competitiveness. As geopolitical turbulence translates to supply threats, volatility in pricing becomes more pronounced. With global tensions persisting, a robust and responsive framework is crucial.

The report focuses on the 2017 Gas Security of Supply Regulation and the 2019 Electricity Risk Preparedness Regulation – both essential to guiding the EU’s energy policy response during the 2021-2023 energy crisis triggered by the Russia-Ukraine conflict.

This marks the first major review of these legislative measures and lays the groundwork for their revision.

Shifting import patterns

Since 2017, the EU’s energy mix has undergone significant transformation, largely driven by the expansion of renewable energy sources. Renewable energy’s share rose from 18.4% in 2017 to 24.5% by 2023. Although fossil fuels remain the dominant source, their overall share has steadily decreased – coal alone fell from 14.7% to 9.6% over the same period.

Natural gas continues to be a crucial input, yet the EU’s domestic output has declined, increasing dependence on imports. Before the invasion of Ukraine, Russia accounted for 45% of the EU’s gas imports. By 2024, Norway had become the top supplier (33%), followed by Russia (19%) and the US (17%).

Discussing the phase-out of Russian oil, Ditte Juul-Jorgensen, Director-General of the European Commission's Directorate-General for Energy, said on LinkedIn: "Our efforts started in January 2022, when gas supply and storage across the EU had been weaponised in what turned out to be the run-up to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

"It was clear that the high level of dependence on Russia for our gas supply was a risk to our security and our economy."

The shift towards liquefied natural gas (LNG) has been one of the most notable outcomes of this geopolitical shift. LNG’s share of gas imports rose from 10% in 2017 to 37% in 2024, led by the US (46%), followed by Russia (20%) and Qatar (12%).

This diversification of supply highlights how the EU’s approach to energy sourcing is evolving toward resilience. By reducing overreliance on any single partner, the bloc aims to protect itself from repeat crises such as the one experienced in 2021–2023.

Assessing the findings

In terms of effectiveness, the report credits the existing framework with improving preparedness and enhancing resilience through greater transparency.

However, it also identifies earlier shortcomings, including insufficient risk assessments and scenario planning. It recommends added focus on cybersecurity, hybrid threats, the availability of critical minerals, and the effects of climate change.

Regarding efficiency, administrative and infrastructure costs formed the bulk of expenditure. While overall costs were relatively low compared to potential crisis losses, the report notes the heavy administrative burden on national bodies and encourages simplification to streamline procedures.

On coherence, most components of the framework work well together, yet stronger coordination is needed as electrification grows and new geopolitical risks emerge.

The review concludes that these regulations have delivered tangible EU-wide benefits by fostering cooperation and risk reduction but highlights opportunities to deepen mitigation strategies further.

Although the framework remains relevant, it must evolve to keep pace with fast-changing energy markets and emerging challenges.