Security of supply is built on choice, not on dogma. It does not come from putting everything on one card. It comes from intelligently combining existing technologies and new solutions. From my perspective, this is the reality we need to address. Wind and solar as the backbone, and for sure we are going to need significantly more storage solutions. But all this needs to be complemented by flexible and deployable power plants that can run on biogas, by storage solutions, and, over time, by synthetic fuels and hydrogen. Resilience means being prepared for different situations: dark doldrums, peak loads, grid constraints, volatile fuel prices. A system that believes in only one “right” technology is vulnerable. A system that allows diversity can adapt, respond and stabilize. The technology mix of the energy transition is not a single answer. It is a mosaic of many building blocks. To me, technology openness does not mean promoting everything indiscriminately. It means setting clear climate targets, equipping ourselves with a broad toolbox. And then scaling the solutions that work in practice: efficient, affordable and available. From an industrial perspective, we look less at ideology and more at operations: What can be built within 12–24 months? What scales? What runs reliably in the field for 20 years? This perspective needs a stronger voice in the energy policy debate. At Rolls-Royce Power Systems, this is exactly how we work: combining flexible gas engine power plants, storage and H₂-ready solutions to align security of supply with climate targets. Anyone who takes security of supply seriously needs technology openness as a strategic insurance for an energy system in transition. I believe progress starts when experience from the field shapes the discussion.
