Much of the debate around Southeast Europe (SEE) electricity market integration focuses on trading platforms and regulatory alignment. Yet the true catalyst lies elsewhere: grid connection rules and flexibility access. Without reform in these areas, convergence remains superficial, and volatility migrates rather than resolves.
Across SEE, grid connection queues are long, opaque, and biased toward generation rather than flexibility. Serbia, Romania, Bulgaria, and Greece have all prioritised renewable connections, often without simultaneous investment in storage, demand response, or fast reserves. The result is rising volatility that spills across borders.
Hungary offers a partial counterexample. By gradually integrating storage and flexibility into its connection framework, it has begun internalising volatility that would otherwise export into Serbia or Croatia. This does not eliminate spreads, but it localises them, reducing systemic shocks while preserving trading opportunity.
Romania’s situation is more fragile. Rapid renewable buildout has outpaced grid reinforcement and flexibility deployment. When congestion occurs, exports are curtailed, and volatility shifts southward into Bulgaria and Serbia. Grid reform here would stabilise regional flows more effectively than any trading rule change.
Greece illustrates both the problem and the potential solution. Solar capacity has surged, but grid and storage lag. As a result, midday surpluses flood neighbouring markets, while evening scarcity reverses flows abruptly. Accelerated storage and flexible grid access would smooth these extremes, reducing stress on North Macedonia, Albania, and Bulgaria.
For Montenegro and Albania, flexibility already exists in the form of hydro. The challenge is grid access and market integration. When hydro cannot respond quickly to regional signals due to grid constraints or market rules, its balancing value is underutilised. Grid reform unlocks existing flexibility rather than creating new assets.
Serbia’s challenge is strategic. Its system contains both baseload and flexibility, but grid and market rules limit full optimisation. Improved access for batteries, demand response, and fast hydro response would reduce import dependence during stress and enhance export value during surplus.
Bosnia and Herzegovina faces a similar crossroads. Coal decline and hydro variability increase the need for flexibility, yet grid reform lags. Without action, volatility will be exported to neighbours or absorbed at high cost domestically.
The conclusion across SEE is consistent. Market coupling alone cannot deliver stability. Grid connection and flexibility reform determine where volatility lives and who pays for it. As EU markets internalise flexibility, SEE systems that lag behind will become volatility sinks, while those that move early will become regional stabilisers—and profit centres.
Elevated by virtu.energy
