Germany, France and the Netherlands cut a cumulative 3.9 TWh of renewable energy last year, according to analysis by energy advisory service Montel Analytics.
Montel’s European price sensitive curtailment report covers commercial curtailment volumes across ten European markets. Germany, France and the Netherlands account for over 80% of the cut volumes across the ten countries monitored in the report, each setting new records for curtailed renewable energy in 2025. The three countries also set new records for hours of negative day ahead prices last year, with Germany recording 539, France 509 and the Netherlands 584.
Germany curtailed 1,749.7 GWh of renewables in 2025, almost 25% higher than in 2024 and above its record set in 2020. Montel’s report says negative prices are starting to occur earlier in the year in Germany, with solar peaks now beginning in April and continuing to the end of September.
The report cites Germany’s solar deployment boom, the timing of renewable generation relative to electricity demand, residual inflexibility in the country’s fuel mix and limited short-term flexibility as reasons for recurring periods of market oversupply. “Commercial curtailment is therefore best understood as a structural outcome of the current phase of the energy transition, where renewable capacity has expanded faster than the system’s ability to absorb and shift that energy through demand growth, storage and flexibility,” Montel’s analysts say.
A similar trend is visible in France, Montel adds, with the country curtailing 1,429 GWh of renewables in 2025.
The report describes commercial curtailment in France as a “rational market outcome” when considering the country’s high solar penetration, inflexible nuclear baseload, slow demand growth and limited flexibility. It then warns that commercial curtailment will likely remain a structural feature of the French power market without faster electrification, more flexible demand and greater storage deployment.
The Netherlands curtailed 708.6 GWh of renewables in 2025. Dutch curtailment is a market response to persistent oversupply, the report says, due to a current imbalance between the pace of renewable capacity growth and the evolution of demand flexibility options. “While electrification of heating, transport and industry is progressing, it has not yet been sufficient to absorb the rapid growth of solar production during peak hours,” Montel's analysis adds.
Across the other seven countries featured in Montel’s report, Finland curtailed 296.9 GWh of renewables last year, compared to 172.7 GWh in Switzerland, 92.6 GWh in Great Britain, 71.1 GWh in Poland, 58.2 GWh in Belgium, 53.8 GWh in Hungary and 34.9 GWh in Austria.
Looking ahead, Montel says that while it is difficult to say whether more curtailment and negative prices will occur in 2026, a trend towards more market-based subsidy regimes, such as contracts for difference (CfD) structures, is expected. CfD-like support schemes are increasingly better suited to Europe’s power system, Montel’s analysis says, explaining that two-way CfDs can suspend support during negative price hours, helping to reduce distortions, limit overproduction and integrate clean capacities into the market without fragmentation.
The report also explains that as Germany is the most mature market in dealing with negative prices and commercial curtailment, its bidding behaviour on the day-ahead market may be an indication on what other markets might evolve towards, before adding that it is “not unthinkable that Germany will be the benchmark for balancing risk.”
“We see the German market is the most liquid intraday market on the continent, with many optimisers and direct marketers servicing renewable asset trading,” Montel’s analysts wrote. “This is another indication that other markets are more likely to trend towards German behavior, rather than the other way around.”
This content is protected by copyright and may not be reused. If you want to cooperate with us and would like to reuse some of our content, please contact: editors@pv-magazine.com.
Is that not a very good indication to increase storage facilities?
Is there no business model for gathering these “overproduction” and put in a BESS? Could this be economical with the decreasing storage costs?