Gigafactories are key to Europe’s strategic autonomy, but years of outsourcing have left the continent reliant on foreign technology. This is why industry and research are now teaming up to regain control of the machines that power the transition. Because the experts’ warning is clear: “If we don’t produce batteries here, we’ll keep losing money and knowledge.”

By Martino De Mori

When China announced new export controls on lithium-ion battery manufacturing equipment in October 2025, it was more than a technical measure. It was a statement of power — a reminder that whoever controls the machines controls the transition. It sharpened Europe’s sense of urgency: after years of research excellence but slow industrial translation, the continent still depends on imported technologies to fuel its clean-energy ambitions. Today China accounts for more than 75% of the world’s battery production capacity, while Europe barely reaches 7%. In addition, over 90% of the permanent magnets and critical materials used in European clean-tech come from China, and the cost of producing low-carbon technologies in Europe or the US remains up to 195% higher.

For economist Guido Cozzi, Professor of Macroeconomics at the University of St. Gallen, Europe’s dependence is not simply the result of market dynamics but of political inertia. “It stems from a combination of late industrial entry, fragmented national policies, and limited coordination in research and innovation funding,” he says. “Unlike the U.S. and China, Europe has lacked large-scale, risk-taking industrial policy instruments to turn research excellence into market leadership.” Cozzi warns that such dependency carries both economic and geopolitical risks, exposing Europe to supply disruptions and strategic pressure. “It can erode Europe’s industrial base and reduce its ability to capture value added.” Recent initiatives such as the European Battery Alliance and the Net-Zero Industry Act show a growing awareness and capacity to act strategically across the continent , but achieving real independence, he adds, “requires a coherent European industrial strategy integrating innovation, investment, and resource policy.”

And yet, behind policy statements and industrial targets, some of the work is already being done. This is where GIGABAT enters the story. Coordinated by CIDETEC Energy Storage, this European project brings together machinery builders, research centres and two emerging gigafactories — Verkor in France and PowerCo, the Volkswagen subsidiary in Germany — to bridge the gap between lab innovation and industrial production. “Europe has the technology,” says Iker Boyano, head of the electrode manufacturing pilot line at CIDETEC, “but we have to put it together and see what is needed from a factory point of view.” In the project’s pilot lines in San Sebastián, Boyano and project coordinator Lucas Moreno test machinery such as advanced mixers, infrared-based drying systems that reduce energy consumption by 20% and drying time by 50%. “We de-risk these technologies for our industrial partners,” Boyano explains, “providing the data and operational evidence to prove that European machinery is not just a concept but a reliable, high-performance solution.” The work is running at pilot scale, testing laboratory prototypes under industrial conditions. “One company in Europe makes the calendering machines, another the drying systems,” Boyano adds. “But when you want to build a full factory, they all need to work together. This is where they learn to do that.”

Moreno describes his project as “a technological toolkit for European gigafactories.” Beyond hardware, the project’s innovation lies in digitalisation: data-driven production lines equipped with advanced sensors, predictive analytics and AI-based quality control, while digital twins simulate entire processes — mixing, coating, calendering — to test optimisations without halting production. Blockchain systems are also being explored to record every step of a battery’s life, forming the base for the future EU Battery Passport. Boyano admits that Europe’s gigafactories are a work in progress, ramping up but not yet producing at full scale. “We are one step behind Asia,” he says. “Part of the reason is structural. In China or Korea you can buy an entire plant from a single provider. In Europe, each company builds a part of the process — but there’s no joint venture that can deliver the full gigafactory.”

GIGABAT tries to change that by harmonising communication protocols and setting out common technical specifications for future gigafactory machinery. “Projects like this make companies know each other, understand each other’s processes, and develop things together,” Boyano says. That culture of cooperation may prove as transformative as any single machine.

But industrial progress alone is not enough. That gap between science and scale is also environmental. Emanuel Bengtsson, researcher at Research Institutes of Sweden, leads the project’s life cycle assessment (LCA) work. “Many of the climate hotspots in battery LCA are upstream, in raw-material production,” he explains. “Europe still lacks domestic supply chains for battery materials, which limits both competitiveness and our ability to manage environmental impact.” His team combines traditional LCA with the newer absolute environmental sustainability assessment (AESA), tracing the footprint of each process and using digital data from pilot lines to identify reduction potential. “One advantage,” he notes, “is that it reveals where action can have the greatest impact.” The link between industrial efficiency and environmental responsibility, he argues, will define Europe’s competitiveness in the coming decade.

However, over the past decades, Europe has outsourced the tools of its progress, remaining vulnerable to decisions made elsewhere — as the October 2025 export restrictions from China showed. Now it is learning, machine by machine, to bring that knowledge home. “European gigafactories are a crucial step toward strategic autonomy,” says Professor Guido Cozzi. “By diversifying supply sources and fostering transparent, sustainable partnerships, Europe can position itself as a coordinator and stabilising actor in global raw-material governance.” He adds that innovation in battery chemistry may, over time, reduce dependence on scarce or environmentally problematic materials altogether. Emanuel Bengtsson agrees that sustainability, done well, can itself become a competitive advantage, strengthening Europe’s ability to shape its own environmental impact: “The new EU Battery Regulation is a key driver here, addressing key sustainability aspects such as carbon-footprint reporting of all batteries placed on the EU market.” Ultimately, it’s a matter of industrial survival, Iker Boyano concludes, “If we don’t produce batteries here, we’re always losing money and knowledge.”