SUMAS · MBA Strategic Research · June 2026

The European Energy Mix & the Impact of Wind through 2040

An offshore-wind strategy study: where Europe stands today, the forces and bottlenecks shaping the next fifteen years, four possible futures, and how two energy giants — Ørsted and TotalEnergies — should play them.

A graduate research project by Vittoria Biscotti · Swetha Karempudi · Tanya Joshi · Ayaka Sambe · Takeru Agawa

Five sustainability leaders, one question

An international MBA cohort at SUMAS Sustainability Management School set out to examine how Europe's major energy companies should leverage offshore wind — one of the continent's key renewable infrastructures — through 2040.

Submitted to Jan Erik Meidell · SUMAS Sustainability Management School, Switzerland

Wind is set to reshape European power

The question is no longer whether wind dominates by 2040 — but how fast, at what cost, and who captures the value.

3→3%
Offshore wind share of EU generation
48→48%
Renewables share of electricity
+0%
Electricity demand growth to 2040
~0×
Increase in offshore wind output

Where wind stands today

Wind's "share" depends on what you measure. In the total energy mix, oil and gas still dominate. In electricity alone, the transition is already visible — in 2025, wind and solar out-generated fossil fuels for the first time.

~40 GW connected — but unevenly

By 2026 Europe has roughly 39–41 GW of offshore wind on the grid, the product of two decades of investment. A handful of North Sea nations hold the majority.

0
United Kingdom · GW
World's most mature market
0
Germany · GW
North Sea cluster projects
0
Netherlands · GW
Fastest-growing market
0–15
MW · today's turbine
~2× output of 5 years ago

A grid that must roughly double

Demand rises from 2,730 to 4,530 TWh — not from waste, but from deliberately electrifying transport, heating, industry and AI. Toggle the chart between 2024 and 2040.

Biggest movers: Transport (EVs, ~5M→90M cars) and Buildings (heat pumps). Source: IEA WEO 2024 · European Commission 2024.

Three self-sustaining forces

Offshore wind grows not because of policy support alone, but because it is economically competitive, strategically necessary, and structurally irreplaceable.

The technology is ready. Everything around it lags.

Three structural constraints threaten the growth targets: permitting, grid connection, and the supply chain.

1

Permitting

3–5 years in the North Sea, 7–9 in the Mediterranean. Reform aims to halve this — but implementation across 27 states is uneven.

2

Grid connection

4–10 year queues on ageing, radial networks. Fixing it needs an estimated €584 billion of EU grid investment by 2030.

3

Supply chain

Vessels can't handle 15 MW+ turbines, ports lack capacity, and subsea cable lead times exceed 36 months.

Lifetime cost (LCOE) by market

The metric that turns cost pressure into investment decisions — €/MWh. Floating wind is still structurally pricier.

The triple threat

Beyond 2030, three constraints converge and reinforce one another — and several trace back to a single dependency: China.

Two forces, four scenarios

Cross the two genuinely independent uncertainties — policy & permitting, and supply-chain resilience — and you map the whole outcome space. Tap a quadrant to explore.

Policy → strong
Supply chain → resilient

One market, two playbooks

The market doesn't need both firms to play the same way. It needs Ørsted to execute, and TotalEnergies to integrate.

Ørsted

Pure-play · execution moat
  • Thirty years of European permitting relationships
  • Largest single component buyer → procurement leverage
  • Standardise & sequence the pipeline for throughput
  • Defence vs. China is institutional, not cost
  • Floating wind as a hedge against commoditisation

TotalEnergies

Integrated major · value edge
  • 7.5 GW concentrated German North Sea hub
  • Wind + storage + long-term PPAs = firm power
  • Capital recycling & portfolio diversification buffer
  • Sell value to industrials, not volume of electricity
  • Risk: capital drifting back to oil & gas

The market through 2040 will not be won on ambition. It will be won on the capacity to execute.

Both companies are structurally better positioned than almost any other developer. If each does what its architecture was built to do, Europe will have two of the world's most capable operators building the energy system the continent needs.

Download the Full Report (PDF)

Vittoria Biscotti · Swetha Karempudi · Tanya Joshi · Ayaka Sambe · Takeru Agawa