As Europe faces intensifying heatwaves, the conversation around energy poverty is evolving. Energy poverty is no longer confined to wintertime hardship: now summer energy poverty – the inability of households to afford or access adequate cooling – is emerging as a critical but under-acknowledged public health crisis. Cool Heating Coalition sits down with policy expert and advocate Marine Cornelis to discuss her latest research, ‘Framing summer energy poverty’. From the human toll of overheating to the urgent need for “just resilience”, Marine calls for cooling to take its place at the centre of Europe’s climate and energy debate.
Cooling is an essential service
With increasing temperatures in Europe, cooling is becoming an essential service. Europe is the fastest-warming continent; the number of days on which cooling was needed has increased by almost four times in the past forty years.
Many cannot keep the heat at bay: 9 to 20% of the EU population are thought to be affected by indoors overheating, making summer a more dangerous period for public health, especially in Southern Europe. In 2022, over 60,000 Europeans died from heat in just three months. Under the current trajectory of 1.5°C global warming, average heat fatalities are expected to increase from around 2,700 to 30,000 a year by 2050.
Cooling is a complex challenge
Too often, “cooling” is equated with air conditioning alone. But, as Marine explains, this vastly oversimplifies what is actually a deeply systemic issue. “It’s not only about installing an air conditioner,” explains Marine. “It’s also about passive measures – urban planning, housing design, ventilation, greenery. It’s about just resilience.”
Passive cooling measures make use of building design and materials to maintain a comfortable temperature indoors. These passive measures employ natural ventilation, shading, and insulation to minimise the need for active cooling, usually provided by conventional air-conditioning systems.
In some urban areas, there can be a 10–15°C difference between the city centre and its rural surroundings. For city inhabitants, this is more than a simple inconvenience – it’s a public health crisis in the making.
“People don’t grasp the danger. Middle-class households often escape to cooler places in the summer. But for those left behind, the reality is isolation, overheating, and in some cases, death,” warns Marine.
Cooling is a social justice issue through and through. The inability to keep homes and cities at a comfortable temperature has profound consequences for the mental and physical health of citizens. It also affects how citizens relate to each other in public spaces. “The elderly, low-income households, the socially isolated – they are the most vulnerable to this issue. Culturally, we romanticise summer, but the reality is different for many: no cooling shelters, no community engagement, no green spaces.”
Progress and innovation: a patchwork landscape
Despite the scale of the problem, there are signs of hope. Cities like Athens, Paris, and Bratislava are piloting nature-based cooling interventions like urban greenery and shaded public spaces. The EU-backed CoolToRise project has tested new educational and awareness-raising strategies, while CoolLIFE is finding the most effective ways to reduce the demand for space cooling.
Some Member States are also acting fast, addressing the rising need for cooling while mitigating summer energy poverty: “Greece adjusted electricity prices to make daytime cooling more affordable. Spain and Italy are also increasingly engaged,” says Marine. In Northern Europe, countries with dynamic renovation landscapes find it easy to pivot towards cooling, even if the need is not as dire as in Southern European states. Danish company Velux, for instance, is making efforts to optimise thermal comfort through monitoring tools, automatic controls, and intelligent shading. In other Member States, however, public awareness and local action are lagging.
What needs to change at the EU level?
To make progress, we must close the data gap. Without reliable indicators, the EU cannot make effective policy decisions. “The last reliable data collection on summer heat deaths was in 2012. To think that the last 10 years have been the hottest on record, yet we don’t have real indicators of the public health impact – this has to change,” urges Marine.
Second, vulnerable populations must be actively included in climate and resilience planning. Cooling should not be seen as a technical add-on; it needs to be built into social planning, urban development, and energy justice frameworks from the start: “Many cities are revisiting their climate strategies right now. That means there’s a unique opportunity to include cooling access for the most vulnerable.”
Third, we need to solve the governance and communication puzzle. Marine highlights the New European Bauhaus as a potential launchpad for integrated urban solutions, but notes that the lack of agreed terminology around summer energy poverty means key initiatives can’t even find each other.
“We don’t even have consistent keywords. That makes it hard to coordinate funding, research, and innovation.”
The financial sector can also have an impact: insurers and crowdfunding platforms could be part of the solution. Projects like PIISA, which develops insurance innovations to cover losses attributable to climate change effects, offer promising models.
“Energy poverty and cooling aren’t future concerns,” Marine concludes. “They’re happening today. We must connect the dots between climate, health, housing, and energy policy. And we must remember: this is about real people. Protecting the vulnerable through smart cooling strategies isn’t just good policy. It’s the right thing to do.”
