News

Europe is entering its second major energy crisis in a few years. Following the shock of 2022, when Russia’s invasion of Ukraine triggered a sharp spike in gas and electricity prices, many cities are once again facing renewed pressure on energy costs, supply security, and social stability.

At the same time, political debates at EU level are increasingly focused on delaying or weakening key parts of Europe’s climate and energy framework, including calls to slow down the energy transition through postponements, exemptions or flexibilities in policies such as emissions trading for buildings and transport. While often presented as short term relief, these approaches risk undermining the very measures that would most effectively protect households and economies from today’s and tomorrow’s energy shocks.

In this week’s conclusions, the Council of the EU stressed that “the clean transition is also the source of strengthened energy and economic sovereignty reinforcing energy security, reducing exposure to energy market shocks and fundamentally reshaping global power relations and partnerships.”

Cities are showing that the best way to protect people today is to accelerate a faster, fairer transition towards decarbonised and energy efficient urban systems.

Root causes and short‑term fixes

The current energy crisis is rooted in Europe’s persistent dependence on imported fossil fuels, compounded by geopolitical tensions and supply side instability. Soaring prices are hitting industrial competitiveness and household budgets; especially in poorly insulated homes and low income neighbourhoods.

In this context, governments can be tempted to fall back on short term fixes: emergency subsidies, tax breaks, support for fossil‑fuel heating, or extensions of coal‑ and oil‑based systems. While these measures may bring temporary relief, they risk locking Europe deeper into fossil fuel dependence, undermining climate neutrality pathways, and leaving cities more exposed to current and future crises.

Europe’s reliance on fossil fuels is already weighing heavily on economic resilience and competitiveness. Cities see the consequences every day: rising energy bills, growing numbers of energy poor households, and increasing public health costs linked to air pollution.

This crisis is a wake up call to stop dependency and support projects that bring multiple benefits: locally produced renewable energy, more secure and affordable supply, local job creation, and opportunities for citizens, especially the most vulnerable, to directly benefit from lower energy consumption and energy savings.

The 2022 energy crisis

Back in 2022, cities were on the front line as the social impacts of the energy crisis unfolded and were among the first to act. As prices surged, they launched a wide range of targeted emergency measures to protect vulnerable residents and reduce energy use in public services.

For example, through initiatives such as the Covenant of Mayors’ Cities Energy Saving Sprint, cities from Bremen to Leuven and Marseille lowered heating temperatures in public buildings to around 18–19°C, with necessary exemptions for schools, daycares, healthcare facilities, emergency services, and certain cultural institutions. Heating schedules were tightened, with systems switched off at night and during weekends.

Others, such as Berlin and Lille, managed hot water and ventilation systems more strictly, reducing use outside occupied hours and limiting heating in storage spaces. Public lighting and municipal buildings in cities like Bordeaux and Hannover saw accelerated conversion to LED systems, alongside dimming or switching off decorative and festive lighting during non‑essential hours.

To complement technical measures, many cities such as Liege and Mannheim launched awareness and behaviour change campaigns targeting municipal staff and, in some cases, businesses and households. These focused on everyday energy use, from lighting and heating to IT and refrigeration.

Some cities also extended their response into schools and youth programmes linking energy sufficiency measures with climate education to support long term behaviour change.

Certain measures implemented by cities addressing other challenges have also proven to have a positive impact on fuel consumption. For instance, cities setting a 30km/h speed limit by default in their territories have observed a reduction in polluting emissions and therefore a reduced fuel consumption of up to 11% in certain cases.

The Hague even created a special taskforce dedicated to the energy crisis. The team coordinates emergency measures, social support schemes, and long term energy efficiency planning, ensuring that crisis responses are coherent and aligned with the city’s climate neutrality targets. The Hague’s approach shows how cities can reorganise their governance to respond to energy shocks in a systemic way, combining short term relief with durable structural change.

Measures that continued beyond the crisis

Not all crisis‑driven measures were rolled back once energy prices stabilised. In the years following the 2022 shock, several cities chose to maintain and embed selected actions into their everyday management practices. While the scope and duration of these measures varied, they helped normalise energy efficiency and sufficiency as core elements of local climate and energy strategies, rather than temporary austerity responses.

For instance, in Vienna, that crisis reinforced the city’s long standing strategy to phase out gas by 2040, especially in heat supply. What had previously been a gradual transition became a clear political priority. The shock accelerated efforts to decarbonise the district‑heating system by expanding renewable and low‑carbon heat sources, while intensifying work on geothermal energy as a stable, local alternative to imported gas.

Grenoble used the crisis as an opportunity to move beyond isolated sectoral measures and adopt a system‑wide energy sufficiency approach. The city introduced a comprehensive energy sufficiency plan, rolling out 25 new energy saving measures across buildings, public lighting, and transport.

As a result, Grenoble reduced its energy consumption by 15% in a single year, saving around €1 million on its energy bill. Rather than treating these reductions as temporary crisis responses, the city created interdisciplinary roles and a dedicated energy‑transition department to monitor energy use in municipal buildings and run awareness campaigns. In Riga, energy‑saving measures led to estimated cost reductions of €4 million. These savings were tracked through the Energy Management System set up by the Riga Energy Agency following the review of the city’s Sustainable Energy and Climate Action Plan (SECAP).

Instead of viewing these savings as one‑off gains, Riga chose to reinvest them in SECAP implementation. In the years immediately following the crisis, the city maintained a 15% energy‑saving target and continued selected measures, such as switching off public lighting during peak price periods, reducing building temperatures and running public awareness campaigns. Ghent framed its response around social justice, knowing that the energy crisis would hit the most vulnerable first. The city therefore, focused on combining immediate support with long‑term solutions that helped people permanently reduce their energy bills.

Ghent’s Energiecentrale functions as a one stop shop for energy efficient home improvements, offering energy loans and financial support alongside practical advice on renovation options and contractor selection. During the energy crisis, demand for its services rose sharply, prompting the city to expand the scope of support to reach more households. The Energiecentrale also runs a citizen science project that collects real time households’ energy use data, enabling the city to monitor the impact of renovations and better target future interventions.

Today, cities continue to collaborate. Through initiatives such as the Fair Energy Transition for All (FETA) project, they are starting to scale up the installation of solar panels and wind turbines, improve home insulation, share practical energy‑saving advice and train people for the jobs needed in the clean energy transition. Across these efforts, they are making sure that low‑income and disadvantaged people are at the heart of every decision.

For example, in Porto, the ‘Asprela + Sustentável’ initiative is setting up renewable energy communities that bring locally produced solar energy into social housing and public buildings. Residents benefit directly from lower energy bills, while the city strengthens local energy supply and citizen involvement.

In Lodz, initiatives linked to the city’s broader revitalisation and sustainable urban development efforts focus on improving neighbourhood environments, increasing energy efficiency, and creating more liveable public spaces through community-driven interventions.

Lessons learned, and the risks of going back to fossil fuels

The current energy crisis highlights once again the urgency of reducing Europe’s dependence on fossil fuels. Accelerating the green transition is not only the best shield against future energy shocks; it is also a matter of strategic autonomy, energy security, and economic resilience. Continued fossil-fuel reliance makes our economies more fragile and unstable, while deepening existing social inequalities and exposing cities to repeated price volatility.

These experiences point to three key lessons. First, saving energy remains the cheapest, cleanest, and safest way to reduce dependence on fossil fuel imports. Second, financial support to consumers should prioritise energy efficiency, direct income support, and social protection measures, rather than subsidising fossil fuel consumption. Third, targeted measures are essential to address energy poverty and protect vulnerable groups, including women and single parent households, who are often disproportionately affected by rising energy costs.

There is a clear risk that renewed crises could trigger policy backsliding. In some Member States, such as Poland, short‑term responses to the 2022 energy crisis included financial support for coal‑based heating. In Italy, the government spent around €1 billion in just two weeks to cut fuel excise duties in order to soften the impact of rising prices. While intended as emergency relief, such measures risk slowing the transition in the heating sector, weakening progress on air quality and climate targets.

Locking in fossil‑fuel infrastructure undermines cities’ ability to meet climate‑neutrality and air‑quality goals and leaves them more exposed to future energy shocks.

Cities as partners in Europe’s response

Today, the European Commission launched its emergency plan, AccelerateEU. The plan largely overlooks the role of cities, despite the fact that most of the measures it highlights, from building efficiency and mobility to awareness‑raising, are designed and delivered at the local level. This gap risks underestimating who is actually implementing Europe’s energy response on the ground. Cities stand ready to be recognised as full partners and to work alongside EU and national governments to protect citizens, reduce the social impact of rising energy costs, and accelerate a sustainable, inclusive path towards climate neutrality.

“The energy crisis confirmed a simple truth: fossil-fuel dependence is a strategic risk. Cities are ready to work with the EU to accelerate renewable based heating and end fossil fuel exposure for good,” says Jürgen Czernohorszky, Executive City Councillor of Vienna and Vice-Chair of the Eurocities Environmental Forum.

Drawing on the lessons of 2022 and their ongoing work through Eurocities towards climate neutrality, cities are already combining short‑term protection for citizens with long‑term investments in resilient, decarbonised energy systems. A credible EU response must start by protecting those most exposed to rising energy costs. Targeted measures are essential to address energy poverty and shield vulnerable groups – including women, single parent households, people with disabilities or with migrant background – from the cost of living impact. Cities have shown that support is most effective when direct income assistance is combined with access to deep renovation services, such as local one‑stop shops that bring together advice, financing and implementation.

At the same time, reducing energy demand must be treated as a priority, not an afterthought. This includes low hanging fruits such as lowering minimum heating temperatures in public buildings and non essential spaces, reducing speed limits in cities or promoting cycling and public transport in cities to cut transport related fuel consumption, and raising awareness among citizens and businesses. These measures are cost effective, fast to implement, and socially visible.

“Immediate energy savings are possible in cities by reducing car dependency,” says Lars Stromgren, Deputy-Mayor for Transport in Stockholm. “Investing in public transport and active mobility cuts fuel use now, while delivering cleaner air and more resilient urban economies.”

Public financial support should therefore be steered decisively towards energy efficiency and clean energy solutions, rather than subsidising fossil‑fuel consumption. Investments in building renovation, clean heating, particularly in public and social housing, and robust social protection schemes strengthen resilience while supporting long‑term climate objectives. Any emergency relief measures should remain clearly targeted and time‑limited, so they do not divert attention from the structural changes Europe needs. Europe must move faster to end its dependence on fossil fuels while avoiding new external vulnerabilities.

“Crisis measures must not become permanent problems,” insists Matteo Lepore, Mayor of Bologna, Eurocities Shadow Commissioner for the Just Transition. “Europe should focus emergency support on vulnerable households and invest public funds in efficiency and clean energy, instead of locking itself deeper into fossil fuels.”

Cities are already contributing by scaling up local renewable energy generation, from solar panels on public buildings to renewable‑based district heating and community energy projects, and by working with distribution system operators to modernise grids and integrate decentralised generation.

Through public procurement and leading by example in buildings, mobility and public services, cities are helping drive the energy transition on the ground. With the right EU framework in place, they can play an even stronger role in delivering energy security, social fairness and climate neutrality together.