Building Community Power in Hungary’s Solar Transition 

Hungary’s solar boom is reshaping energy debates, but real transition depends on communities learning to act together. 

Hungary’s solar capacity has surged over the past decade, but the country’s shift toward citizen-led, community-based energy systems is still in its early stages. At Friends of the Earth Hungary in Budapest, Everything Is Changing Host Ahmetcan Uzlaşık speaks with Community Energy Expert Ágnes Szalkai-Lőrincz about the realities behind Hungary’s booming solar numbers, the cultural and structural barriers still holding back energy communities, and the kind of “solarpunk” future locals could build if trust and cooperation become part of daily life. 

With over 7,500 megawatts of solar already installed, Hungary is not short on sunshine, or ambition. But, as Szalkai-Lőrincz explains, meaningful energy transition requires more than photovoltaics. It requires communities ready to share responsibility, resources, and power. 

I’m Ágnes Szalkai-Lorincz, Community Energy Expert at the National Society of Conservationists, Friends of the Earth Hungary. We are a nationwide environmental NGO based in Budapest, and we work on a wide range of issues, from nature conservation and GMO policy to environmental justice and energy. We are also the Hungarian partner of the Bankwatch Network, which allows us to engage with European-level debates on finance, infrastructure and renewable energy development. 

My focus is specifically on community energy, which for us means not just the technical side of producing or sharing electricity, but the social and organisational processes that allow ordinary people to participate meaningfully in the energy transition. That ranges from helping municipalities design renewable systems, to guiding NGOs through the electricity market, to supporting emerging energy communities as they navigate legal, financial and cultural challenges. 

Hungary is a country where community structures were weakened over decades of political and social centralisation, so part of our work is about relearning cooperation. Energy is only the hook; the deeper goal is rebuilding trust, agency and shared responsibility. 

Hungary has experienced an extraordinary solar boom. Today we have more than 7,500 megawatts of installed capacity, an enormous figure for a country of our size. And more than 300,000 households have their own rooftop PV systems. In many parts of Hungary, especially in rural regions and the sunny southern counties, it is difficult to walk through a village without seeing panels on rooftops or small commercial systems feeding into the grid. In that sense, yes, we are “covered” with solar. 

But that doesn’t mean our system is mature. The biggest bottleneck is no longer installation, it is integration. We now have periods when the grid receives more solar energy than it can use or store, and Hungary is only taking the first steps toward developing proper energy-sharing schemes. We lack the digital infrastructure, the regulatory framework and the market incentives that would allow communities to allocate surplus energy fairly and efficiently. 

All the actors, distribution companies, regulators, and cooperatives are working on models, but we are still at a very early stage. Without tools for sharing, balancing and forecasting, much of this solar potential remains underutilised. 

Unfortunately, no. Our energy mix is still dominated by fossil fuels, especially natural gas and oil, much of it imported from Russia or other eastern suppliers. Solar has transformed the electricity sector during the daytime, but heating and transport remain deeply fossil-based. Wind energy has almost disappeared from new investments due to regulatory barriers. Biomass and biogas exist but play limited roles. 

What is often overlooked is our extraordinary geothermal potential. Hungary’s geology is ideal for geothermal heating and low-temperature applications, and our famous thermal baths are proof of that. But geothermal remains underused because we lack coherent policy direction and long-term financial support for municipalities. If Hungary truly wants to reduce dependence on imported energy, geothermal should be a central pillar of our strategy. 

So yes, we have a strong solar foundation, but a genuinely resilient, diversified, low-carbon energy system is still far away. 

Solarpunk, in my interpretation, is not only aesthetic, it’s a social vision. It imagines technology and nature supporting one another, but also communities supporting one another. In a solarpunk Hungary, people would treat energy as a shared resource, not just a commodity or an individual investment. 

I imagine ecological farms where solar installations provide shade for crops, energy for irrigation and cooling, and income for the community. I imagine reused solar panels giving a second life to old equipment. I imagine vulnerable households receiving support not out of charity, but out of solidarity, because a community understands that energy poverty is a collective issue, not a private failure. 

We already have enough solar. The next step is using it wisely and cooperatively. That means preventing large corporations from dominating the transition, and empowering local citizens to make decisions that serve people and ecosystems. A solarpunk future is a future where Hungarians see themselves not just as consumers, but as co-creators of their energy system. 

Community energy is essential, but Hungary is not yet ready for it socially. We are missing the baseline, because we lack mature, cohesive local communities that can take collective decisions. After decades of centralised governance, people learned to expect solutions from above: someone else will build, someone else will decide, someone else will pay. 

This mentality makes it difficult to build the kind of participatory structures that energy communities require. Cooperation does not happen automatically. Many people still think in purely individual terms. If I don’t have the money or time or expertise, I’ll postpone the problem. 

What we need is a cultural shift, small everyday practices of sharing, joint ownership and mutual support. Without that social foundation, energy communities will struggle no matter how good the legislation is. 

All three matter, but the cultural obstacle is the deepest. Energy communities require trust, transparency and a sense of shared purpose, and these habits were weakened by Hungary’s historical experience. For decades, citizens were told that decisions about infrastructure and resources were not their responsibility. That legacy still shapes behaviour today. 

I often explain this with a simple example from my street. Four families share one lawnmower. It sounds insignificant, but this small act reflects a mindset: understanding that not every household needs to own everything individually. This is the seed of cooperative thinking, and in Hungary these seeds are sparse. 

Financially, the challenge is that household electricity prices are artificially low, making it economically irrational for citizens to join energy-sharing schemes. Legally, energy communities lack strong incentives and procedural advantages. Combined, these factors push the sector toward institutional and industrial actors rather than citizens. 

We currently have around 15 registered energy communities, a very small number for a country of 10 million people. Most emerged through EU-funded projects, because there is no domestic incentive to register one. These communities include small municipalities, village cooperatives, charging-station networks and pilots combining monitoring, demand-side management and local production. 

But here is the key point: none of these communities include private citizens as members. Not yet. The economics simply don’t make sense under the current pricing structure. So while Hungary has interesting pilots, we do not yet have community energy in the true European sense, where citizens co-own and co-govern renewable assets. 

Trust comes from presence and reliability, so I’ll be there for you. In our own energy community at Friends of the Earth Hungary, we make ourselves available. If a member needs help navigating the electricity market, understanding a contract, monitoring consumption data or applying for a tender, we support them. 

Energy markets are intimidating. If you can guide people through this complexity, if you answer their questions, respond to their concerns and help them when they feel overwhelmed, they begin to see you as a partner, not an authority. 

There is no single formula. Trust grows from repeated, meaningful interactions. My approach would simply be: I am here, and I will help you move forward. When people feel supported, they stay committed. 

Right now that criticism is accurate, but incomplete. Energy communities currently attract wealthier, more educated citizens because they have the time and resources to engage early. But that does not mean marginalised groups cannot be included later. 

In fact, inclusion requires a strong foundation first. A community must stabilize its governance, finances and operations before it can responsibly integrate more vulnerable members. If we want energy to become a tool for social justice, we must first create functioning structures that can actually deliver benefits. 

So yes, today energy communities are socially narrow. But if we build them correctly, they can become bridges rather than barriers. 

I would remind you that transition unfolds step by step. Budapest alone accounts for almost one quarter of Hungary’s total electricity consumption. No one claims that rooftop solar alone will power the capital. But these projects demonstrate ownership, strengthen resilience and empower citizens. They are not symbolic, they are preparatory. 

Moreover, Hungary’s transition will not rely solely on solar. It will require geothermal power, waste heat recovery, decentralized storage, and many other solutions. Community energy is part of a diversified pathway. Dismissing it as symbolic overlooks the deeper transformation it enables: the rebuilding of social infrastructure. 

The first thing I would change is permitting. Energy communities should receive simplified, accelerated procedures so they are not competing with commercial developers on unequal terms. 

Second, I would make energy sharing a right exclusive to communities or dependent on community partnerships. Industrial actors would be required to collaborate with local citizens, through PPAs or shared investments, so economic value stays within the region. 

Third, I would introduce two-stage financial support. The first stage would fund planning and feasibility studies. Only communities with realistic models would receive the second stage: substantial financial backing to build actual infrastructure. This would prevent dysfunctional projects while channeling support where it can create real impact. 

And finally, I would ensure all these reforms are embedded in a broader environmental framework, because energy systems must serve both people and nature.