Ukraine and the New Energy World A Strategic: Report on the Architecture of the Future Energy System

Click here to read the article in Ukrainian.

Ukraine and the New Energy World

A Strategic Report on the Architecture of the Future Energy System

Author: Oleksii Butenko, expert on strategic development and anti-crisis actions in the energy sector.

Foreword

This report addresses the key questions currently shaping debate in Ukraine’s energy sector:
– Do state-owned companies need supervisory boards?
– Is there still a place for “anti-crisis headquarters” and rigid vertical control?
– What should be done with Naftogaz, long at the center of public frustration?
– What comes first — an economic model, or the energy foundation on which it must be built?

Energy has become the primary indicator of a nation’s resilience.
The way a country manages its energy defines not only its economy, but also its defense, social stability, and international credibility.
Ukraine has faced an unprecedented test — the largest infrastructure war of the 21st century — and proved that it can not only recover but also set new global standards of resilience.

1. The Infrastructure War: A New Type of Global Conflict

The war against Ukraine redefined the concept of power.
Victory today means not only the ability to destroy, but the capacity to rebuild.
Russia bet on paralyzing Ukraine by destroying its energy infrastructure — aiming to plunge the country into darkness and chaos.
Ukraine responded with speed, adaptability, and technology.

The energy system that survived thousands of attacks became a model of resilience.
Mobile repair brigades, decentralized generation, digital tools, and international cooperation created an entirely new response model.
Ukrainian energy workers became “soldiers of light.”
Their ability to restore grids under fire proved that human capital can be a weapon stronger than any arsenal.

Ukraine also learned to act asymmetrically.
Targeted strikes on the adversary’s oil refining infrastructure became part of a new deterrence strategy.
Energy is no longer just a vulnerability — it is a tool of strength.

2. Anti-Crisis Headquarters and the Market: The End of Manual Control

Ukraine has experienced several phases of crisis management: 2014, 2022.
Then, anti-crisis headquarters fulfilled their purpose — to keep the system functioning.
Today, as the country enters a phase of long-term recovery and modernization, this model no longer works.

Manual control is a reaction to chaos, not a system of development.
A true anti-crisis strategy means liberalization.
An open, competitive, and transparent market creates its own balance and discipline.
Competition — not command — ensures stability.

Ukraine must shift from vertical decision-making to horizontal interaction.
This requires a new paradigm: from mobilization thinking to institutional resilience.
That means:
– fast and clear decision-making procedures;
– digital monitoring platforms;
– transparent accounting;
– active participation of business, local communities, and society.

The state should focus on the rules of the game, not on controlling players.
That is how genuine energy democracy is built.

3. Political Leadership as Crisis Management

Effective governance in wartime is not only about technical solutions but also about trust.
Crisis systems are held together not by orders, but by confidence in shared purpose.
Political leadership in Ukraine has become an example of modern crisis management — based on strategy, decisiveness, communication, and constant public presence.

The Ukrainian experience shows that in a multi-level crisis — war, energy pressure, economic stress — leadership becomes an infrastructure of trust.
It provides society with stability even when circumstances change daily.
This model of governance is now studied by international institutions as a case of successful crisis leadership under systemic stress.

4. Naftogaz: From Phantom Monopoly to a Multifunctional Corporation of the Future

Naftogaz mirrors the Ukrainian economy — its weaknesses and untapped potential.
For years the company was an instrument of politics rather than development.
But it can become the platform for a new energy model.

The future Naftogaz should be a multi-energy holding, integrating gas and oil production, power generation, bioenergy, hydrogen, digital services, and heat supply.
This is not an empire, but a partnership platform.
Each direction must be transparent, self-sufficient, and competitive.

The key to transformation is controlled privatization: audit, corporatization, partial IPO, and engagement of strategic investors.
The state keeps control, but opens the door to capital and responsibility.

History has shown two contrasting lessons:
Kryvorizhstal — transparency brought growth;
Odesa Port Plant — politics brought stagnation.
Transparency delivers progress; politics breeds decay.

Naftogaz can evolve into Ukraine’s equivalent of Equinor or Orlen — a modern, technology-driven corporation leading the energy transition.

5. Supervisory Boards, Ownership, and Corporate Culture

The debate about supervisory boards is a reflection of the state’s maturity.
When ownership remains fully public, independence is often symbolic.
When private capital is present, boards become genuine strategic institutions.
They serve as mechanisms of control, trust, and professionalism.

Supervisory boards make sense only in a transparent, competitive environment with clear accountability.
They should be spaces of competence, not compromise.
Institutional trust is also a pillar of energy security.

6. What Comes First: Energy or the Economy

In the 20th century, economic models were built first, and energy systems followed.
In the 21st, the sequence has reversed.
Energy now defines the scale, speed, and competitiveness of economies.

The foundation must be the architecture of the energy system itself:
a balance of generation, grids, storage, reserves, and cybersecurity.
Industry, data centers, hydrogen infrastructure, and “green” chemistry emerge around it.
Where energy is stable — development follows.

7. The Architecture of Ukraine’s Energy Future

Ukraine possesses all prerequisites to design its own independent, technological, and sustainable energy model.
Its structure could look like this:
– 60% — small modular reactors (SMR);
– 20% — highly flexible gas generation;
– 10% — renewables with storage;
– plus bioenergy as the fuel of self-sufficiency.

Such a model ensures not only energy security but also drives economic growth — new industries, jobs, and investment.
It marks the transition from resource dependency to technological sovereignty.

8. Ukraine as the Energy Hub of Eastern Europe

Energy is the new geopolitics.
Ukraine can become a bridge between the EU and the Black Sea region — part of the European Hydrogen Backbone, a net exporter of green electricity and biomethane.
Its storage capacity, infrastructure, engineers, and geography provide unique advantages.

Ukraine can evolve into a hub for energy exchange, hydrogen production, data centers, and innovation industries.
Energy integration with the EU means integration into the continent’s security system.
Those who control energy flows, control stability.

9. Energy as the Anchor of Ukraine’s New Economy

We have long thought in reverse: first the economy, then energy.
But the world has changed.
Today, energy shapes the economy — setting its rhythm, stability, and credibility.

Ukraine must build its own model — technological, transparent, and partnership-based.
Energy is not just power — it is a philosophy of strength.
It is proof of national sovereignty and the ability to grow without external dependence.

Energy is the future.
And that future has a Ukrainian face.

Author: Oleksii Butenko, expert on strategic development and anti-crisis actions in the energy sector.