For investors in photovoltaic and storage projects, competitiveness is no longer just about the price per installed megawatt. Execution speed, equipment availability and the ability to manage regulatory risks can determine whether a project reaches commercial operation on schedule, said George Drobot, Managing Director Sunotec Romania, at the Romania’s Green Momentum conference, organised by Energynomics.
Sunotec, an EPC group headquartered in Bulgaria, has been active in photovoltaic and storage projects since 2012 and has been present in Romania since 2025. The company positions itself locally as a system integrator, providing turnkey engineering, procurement and construction services. Drobot pointed to direct control over execution as one of the group’s strengths: Sunotec works with its own personnel and has more than 1,700 employees deployed across construction sites in Europe.
“Market competitiveness isn’t just about the price per installed megawatt, it’s about time-to-market,” Drobot said. For investors, reaching COD as quickly as possible is what matters, while the EPC contractor must provide a realistic implementation timeline and be able to mobilise additional staff when timelines need to be shortened.
In Romania, Sunotec has signed storage projects totalling 500 MWh in the construction phase, as well as two completed photovoltaic projects totalling 120 MWp. Storage projects currently in the bidding phase exceed 5 GW. The company also targets long-term service agreements for batteries, covering periods of 10 or 15 years and providing guarantees for performance, availability and efficiency.
One significant source of pressure comes from the supply chain. Drobot warned that removing Chinese inverters and PCS units from the European market could substantially increase delivery times. Even today, delivery of PCS units from China can take around 8-9 months to reach the site. Some Chinese manufacturers already have production units in Europe, but their number remains limited, and rapid restrictions could delay projects and development targets.
Another risk concerns grid-connection equipment. For projects connecting at the 110 kV level, Drobot highlighted the new European requirements on fluorinated gases in electrical switchgear and the pressure they could create on project timelines towards the end of 2027. According to him, a conventional SF6 solution currently has a delivery time of around 8-9 months, compared with about 14 months for an SF6-free alternative.
Drobot also gave the example of a project where the technology choice was influenced by the lender. The lender rejected the SF6 option because it considered the risk too high, even though that solution would have allowed the project to maintain an end-2027 deadline. Choosing the SF6-free alternative pushed commissioning into 2028. “Our role as EPC is to put on the table for the investor what risk they want to take, meaning what is the smallest risk they are willing to assume,” Drobot said.
The message is that price remains important, but it can become secondary if a cheaper solution brings delays, exposure to regulatory changes or availability problems. In a market with gigawatts of projects currently in the bidding phase, the difference between pipeline and capacity actually brought online will increasingly depend on execution, access to equipment and risk management. For investors, time-to-market is therefore becoming part of project bankability.
The Romania’s Green Momentum conference was organised by Energynomics, with the support of Elektra Renewable Support, ADEX, Adrem Asset Management, Big Store, CBRE, Elnos Romania, Eximprod, Global Techniques for Energy, SAJ, Sermatec, Sigenergy, Solar Today, Sunotec, TBEA, Think Blu Solution and WALDEVAR Energy.