In the face of constant threats to critical infrastructure, Ukraine and Moldova must move away from the Soviet model of energy “gigantomania.” A reliable path to stability lies through decentralization, market tariffs, and deep diversification. This is stated by energy security expert Mykhailo Pyrtko in his recent analytical article.
As the specialist notes, striving for complete energy autarky in modern conditions is an unrealistic goal, especially for countries with damaged or comparatively small energy systems.
“The illusion of absolute energy independence is one of the most common myths in public policy. For small countries or states whose infrastructure has suffered critical damage, attempts to achieve complete autarky are not only economically impractical but also technically dangerous,” emphasizes Mykhailo Pyrtko.
The expert explains that the power grids of Ukraine and Moldova currently lack significant reserve capacities, meaning the failure of even one key facility can trigger a systemic outage. According to him, the modern paradigm of energy security is primarily about system flexibility.
Georgia’s Path: A Successful Transformation and Investment Boom
Mykhailo Pyrtko considers Georgia to be one of the most illustrative examples of successful energy transformation. Facing severe energy deficits and external gas pressure in the past, the country managed to fundamentally change its situation through a series of pragmatic decisions.
“Moving away from monopolistic gas supplies and establishing a strategic partnership with Azerbaijan allowed Tbilisi to secure stable energy resources and mitigate external pressure. This is a classic example of how geopolitical logistics can solve the problem of a basic resource deficit,” the expert highlights.
Furthermore, Georgia focused on developing distributed hydropower and implementing market deregulation. According to Pyrtko, transparent rules without bureaucratic barriers “attracted billions of dollars in private investment and proved that a transparent market effectively builds new generation.”
Three Steps for Kyiv and Chisinau
Based on the Georgian experience, Mykhailo Pyrtko outlines three key vectors for transforming the energy security architecture of Ukraine and Moldova:
- Decentralization of generation. Instead of restoring vulnerable mega-stations, it is necessary to rapidly build a network of smaller facilities (gas-piston and biogas plants, renewable energy sources). “Physically destroying or destabilizing dozens of small facilities scattered across different regions is much more difficult than stopping a single mega-station,” the expert notes.
- Deep integration with EU markets. Technical synchronization with ENTSO-E should evolve into full Market Coupling for instant commercial cross-border electricity flows to cover peak loads.
- Pragmatic tariff policy. The expert insists on abandoning the artificial capping of prices, which generates debts and deters investors: “The only effective solution is a transition to market prices with the parallel implementation of a system of monetized, targeted subsidies for socially vulnerable consumers.”
The Importance of Balancing the Grid
While praising Georgia’s achievements, Mykhailo Pyrtko notes that any major energy transition requires continuous refinement. He points out that a strong reliance on hydropower naturally creates seasonal variations, as winter river levels drop while overall electricity consumption rises.
“For Ukraine and Moldova, this is a clear indicator of the need for balanced development. The expansion of renewable energy sources must definitely be accompanied by a proportional commissioning of highly maneuverable capacities and industrial energy storage systems. Balancing tools are essential to minimize risks and maintain grid stability,” Pyrtko concludes.
Overall, the analyst notes, energy security in the 21st century is measured not by the number of massive power plants, but by the capacity of cross-border interconnectors, the depth of decentralization, and a transparent investment climate.
