IN Brief:
- The Great Sea Interconnector may need additional funding if project cost increases are confirmed.
- The subsea HVDC link is planned to connect Greece, Cyprus, and later Israel.
- Cyprus remains the only EU member state without an electricity interconnection to another member.
The Great Sea Interconnector may require additional funding if a European Investment Bank assessment confirms higher costs for the planned subsea electricity link between Greece, Cyprus, and later Israel.
The project is planned as a high-voltage direct current interconnection linking the Greek and Cypriot electricity systems in its first phase, with a later extension to Israel. It remains one of the most technically demanding transmission schemes in the eastern Mediterranean, combining long subsea cable sections, converter station infrastructure, and cross-border regulatory coordination.
Cyprus is the only EU member state without an electricity interconnection to another member state. A completed link would connect the island to the wider European electricity market, improve security of supply, and create a route for electricity exchange across a region with growing renewable generation potential.
The scheme has an estimated cost of €1.9bn and has already secured EU support, including a €657m commitment. Additional capital may now be required if the EIB review confirms that costs have risen, placing financing and procurement back under scrutiny after a long development period shaped by engineering complexity, geopolitical risk, and supply-chain pressure.
The project is being advanced through a special purpose vehicle under Greece’s Independent Power Transmission Operator. It builds on earlier plans for a EuroAsia interconnection and is structured around a first phase connecting Crete and Cyprus, followed by a further link towards Israel.
Subsea HVDC projects have become central to European power planning because they can connect isolated systems, move renewable generation across regions, and improve resilience by linking markets with different generation profiles. The same projects also carry substantial delivery risk. Cable manufacturing capacity, specialist vessels, seabed surveys, converter station procurement, permitting, and cross-border cost allocation can all reshape programme schedules.
Interconnector projects across Europe are being judged increasingly on system value as well as engineering feasibility. Sweden’s decision to pause a Denmark interconnector plan showed how governments and regulators are weighing market design, price effects, regional benefit, and consumer cost alongside technical capability. The Great Sea Interconnector sits in a different geography, but it faces a similar requirement to align grid engineering with economic and political acceptance.
For islanded or weakly connected systems, interconnection can change the operating model of the power grid. It can reduce reliance on local fossil-fuel generation, support renewable integration, widen access to balancing resources, and strengthen reserve sharing. In Cyprus, the link would also end long-standing electrical isolation from the EU system.
The engineering requirements remain considerable. The eastern Mediterranean route involves deep-water cable installation, long subsea sections, and converter stations capable of managing high-voltage direct current flows between systems with different operating characteristics. HVDC technology is established, but large subsea schemes are exposed to limited global manufacturing slots and specialist installation capacity.
Those pressures have intensified as offshore wind, interconnectors, oil and gas electrification, island grid projects, and transmission reinforcement compete for subsea cables and high-voltage equipment. Converter transformers, cable systems, protection equipment, control systems, and marine installation resources are no longer niche procurement items; they are strategic assets in the energy transition supply chain.
Financing therefore sits directly on the delivery path. If additional funding is required, procurement timing, contract awards, and construction sequencing may need to be adjusted. If funding is resolved, the project will still have to move through the physical constraints of cable manufacture, converter station delivery, marine works, and grid integration at the landing points.
The Great Sea Interconnector remains a strategic project because it combines energy security, market integration, and renewable power exchange in a region where electrical isolation has long shaped system planning. Its next phase will test whether European interconnection delivery can keep pace with rising project costs and increasingly constrained high-voltage supply chains.