06.05.2026
On July 9, the Energy Club Europe-Ukraine Energy Trading Forum 2026 Recovery, Market Coupling & New Trading Frontiers will gather key energy market players in Budapest — traders, regulators, investors, and infrastructure operators who are shaping the new configuration of energy trading in Europe. The event will serve as a meeting point for those who do not just observe changes but monetize them. At the center of the discussions will be the practical launch of Market Coupling, the new logic of gas flows following the cessation of Russian transit, the role of Ukrainian UGS in balancing the region, the development of biomethane, and Ukraine’s integration into European regulatory frameworks, including REMIT.
During the second panel of the forum, “Gas, Storage, Biomethane, and Regulatory Signals: A New Regional Energy Logic,” one of the keynote speakers will be Insa Antipova — Director of Legal Consulting at Correggio Consulting.
In an interview with Energy Club journalist Olena Karpachova, Insa Antipova outlined the situation without sugarcoating: the Ukrainian gas market is of interest to traders but remains a “risk market” due to the war. The most realistic opportunities today are working with UGS and trading at the border, while the long-term prospects lie in the customs warehouse storage regime and biomethane. The key condition for growth is not so much new instruments as it is trust: clear rules, contract protection, and predictability, without which Ukraine will not be able to fully establish itself as a regional gas hub.
– Ms. Antipova, if we look at the Ukrainian gas market through the eyes of a European trader, which opportunities today look the most realistic and commercially interesting?
– I think we should immediately and honestly admit a fundamental thing: today, the biggest factor hindering the development of the Ukrainian gas market is the hostilities on Ukrainian territory. This is not only about the physical security of infrastructure but also about the general unpredictability that martial law creates for businesses, investors, and traders. The market is working, adapting, and even developing, but much slower than expected. Any prospects for Ukraine still have to be evaluated through the prism of military risks.
To speak frankly, from the perspective of a European trader, the most interesting story right now is price arbitrage through Ukrainian UGS. When the time-spread between summer and winter is attractive, and the risks (including those of martial law) are more or less acceptable, traders are ready to inject gas. This is a classic play that we all understand well. The second most realistic option is direct gas sales to Ukrainian buyers at the border. But here, honestly, there aren’t that many opportunities, and it mostly comes down to working with state-owned companies.
In the long term, I see two directions as the most interesting. First, the customs warehouse — using Ukrainian storage facilities as a commercial seasonal buffer for European gas. Second, in the medium to long term, of course, biomethane.
– Ukraine has been operating without the transit of Russian gas for over a year. In your opinion, how has this changed the logic of gas flows in Central and Eastern Europe?
– The situation as a whole has changed quite significantly. The diversification of flows has strengthened notably. Eastern European countries are more actively using LNG. TurkStream has gained much more weight, especially for Slovakia and Hungary. And we should not forget about the ban on Russian pipeline gas in the EU, which will happen very soon — next year. In this new reality, Ukraine could gain a very interesting role. We can become a neutral regional hub. Our UGS and GTS are geographically perfectly located for balancing the countries in the region. If we offer stable tariffs, transparent rules, and contract protection, Ukraine can take a significant place in the European gas infrastructure.
– To what extent can the Ukrainian gas transmission system today be viewed not just as infrastructure for internal needs, but as part of a new regional logistics for supplying gas to Central Europe?
– We have strong infrastructure, technical readiness, and unique flexibility that can be very valuable for Europe, especially during peak winter periods when these issues become critical. There are also interesting new routes, for example — the Vertical Gas Corridor from the south, through Greece to Ukraine. This is promising, but here, as always in the gas market, economics decides everything: if the route is too expensive, the trader will simply choose another option. Therefore, the questions of tariffs and commercial attractiveness are key.
But if we look more broadly, the greatest competitive advantage of Ukraine, in my opinion, is the combination of two elements: underground storage and, in the future, biomethane. This specific combination can make Ukraine a truly important player in the region. However, biomethane still requires clear rules of the game, largely on the part of the EU, but also from Ukraine. Without regulatory certainty, it will be difficult to realize this potential. Technically, Ukraine can produce biomethane very cheaply thanks to agricultural waste. But without serious state support, simplified grid connections, and the full opening of European markets, there will be no mass profitable export.
– A separate topic of the forum is Ukrainian underground gas storage facilities. What specific products or operating models could make UGS truly interesting for European traders again?
– At the heart of commercial interest, there will always be a few basic things: product economics (i.e., attractive time-spreads), resource security, legal and market certainty, and most importantly — the trader must have absolute confidence that they can withdraw their gas exactly when it is commercially necessary. If these conditions are met, Ukrainian UGS can again become a very strong product for the European market. The market needs not just storage capacity, but flexible commercial products.
– In your opinion, has trust in Ukrainian storage been restored after the strikes on infrastructure, or does this remain an open question for the European market?
– The Ukrainian side, in particular the teams of GTSOU and Ukrtransgaz, demonstrated a high level of professionalism and operational resilience under extremely difficult conditions. This was a strong signal to the market. But at the same time, for some European traders, the question of resource security remains open.
– What legal and contractual aspects currently worry foreign companies the most when they consider the possibility of working in the Ukrainian gas market?
– I’m afraid I won’t say anything revolutionary here. Foreign companies want very basic but critically important things: first, protection from sudden changes in the rules of the game. Second, guarantees of non-discriminatory access to infrastructure and transparent market conditions. And third, a clear mechanism for the protection of rights, including the possibility of international arbitration, the actual enforcement of decisions, and trust in the national judicial system. For international business, legal certainty is no less important than the commercial attractiveness of the market.
– How ready is the Ukrainian market today for full integration into European culture in terms of rules, transparency, and contractual practices?
– The Ukrainian market has come a long way in recent years, especially after 2014. Overall, it has already come quite close to the European model, at least in terms of basic rules and market liberalization. Plus, an important step forward is the implementation of the Ukrainian REMIT, which is gradually pulling transparency and market behavior toward European standards.
But to be honest, the gap between rules “on paper” and how they sometimes work in practice is still noticeable. The market still occasionally lacks stability and predictability in the application of these rules.
Another important point is the contractual culture. Here, we are still in the process of formation. In Europe, standardized approaches like EFET have existed for a long time, making the market very clear and fast. In Ukraine, this level of unification does not yet exist, so many things are decided individually. This means there is still a lot of work ahead, both in standardizing contracts and in the market getting used to more “European” templates.
– Regarding REMIT, market transparency, and protection against manipulation, how much progress has Ukraine made in approaching European standards specifically in the gas segment?
– Regarding REMIT and market transparency, there is certainly progress, but it is not yet complete. Ukraine is moving in the right direction, but full compliance with European REMIT is still to be achieved. Especially regarding the transparency of insider information and actual sanctions for manipulation. For example, last year at Correggio, we worked on creating the first comprehensive market surveillance rules in Ukraine based on REMIT principles. Essentially, our task was to help the NEURC build a modern approach to market monitoring that meets European standards.
The next stage is full integration into the European system, which will come along with the growth of exchange trading and liquidity. The more liquidity and transparent exchange mechanisms there are, the more competitive the market becomes and the more interesting it will be for European traders.
– Do you see a risk that excessive regulatory complexity or instability of rules could be as much of a deterrent as the war factor?
– I would still put the war factor in first place today. To be honest, it is currently difficult to see significant interest from European traders specifically in the domestic Ukrainian gas market simply because Ukraine does not currently have a great need for imported resources for domestic commercial consumption. Instead, at the border or in working with UGS, the war risk, asset security issues, and general assessment of the country’s political risks play a larger role. That is, for a foreign trader right now, the key question is not so much “what is the regulation,” but “how safe is it to enter this market.”
– Biomethane is one of the key topics of the forum. In your view, what is currently holding back the development of Ukrainian biomethane exports more: legal barriers, market infrastructure, or the lack of a sufficiently clear commercial model?
– Speaking of biomethane, the biggest restraining factor today is the unresolved issues in the EU regarding the full recognition of Ukrainian biomethane and the organizational problems associated with this. Also, the issue with the European biomethane registry, UDB, remains unresolved. The European biomethane market is fragmented, which also negatively affects export opportunities.
– To what extent can the themes of gas storage, biomethane, and new regional logistics become not just a part of energy security for Ukraine, but a separate commercial niche in the European market?
– Yes, absolutely. Moreover, I think this is precisely where Ukraine has a chance to occupy its own separate, very interesting niche in the European energy market. For many European players, the main interest in Ukraine lies in underground storage and trading at the border — segments where Ukraine already has a real and strong infrastructural advantage. If you add the development of cross-border products for regional balancing and, in the future, biomethane, a very strong combination could emerge. In fact, Ukraine could offer the market not just transport or storage, but a comprehensive energy product: storage, flexibility, and “green” gas.
– What is the main signal Ukraine should give to European traders today so that they look at our gas market not just as a risk zone, but as a market of opportunities?
– I think the main signal from Ukraine should be very simple: the rules of the game here are clear, they are stable, and they can be counted on not just for a year, but strategically.
European traders are used to working where there is predictability, investment protection, respect for contracts, and a transparent regulator. They don’t need beautiful declarations; they need a clear sense that the money invested, the contracts signed, and the business models built will be protected.
As soon as the market gives this signal, Ukraine will begin to be perceived not only as a risk zone but as a market of opportunities — and very interesting ones at that.
In conclusion, it all comes down to a simple but fundamental point: Ukraine already has the infrastructure, geography, and market potential to become an important element of the European energy system. But the main condition is the trust of European traders and investors. And it is precisely on whether the country can ensure stable rules of the game and real investment protection that it depends whether it will become a long-term point of growth and a new energy hub for Europe.
