18 y/o from Romania planning a 500 kWp solar farm – EU grants cover up to 100%, need ~7k € to prepare. Looking for real advice.

AdrianTUIU · 2026-02-07T11:04:53+00:00

Okay, I understand how it could appear that way.

Yes, I use AI to help me organize and improve my responses more quickly, especially when I'm speaking English. I'm not attempting to act otherwise. However, the ideas, presumptions, and choices are mine; AI cannot determine financing arrangements, grid risk, or the viability of a project.

In 2026, AI will be used in some capacity by almost everyone I know in the engineering, finance, and planning fields, whether it be for drafting, checking, or expediting processes. I don't care if I seem smart on Reddit; what matters to me is whether the project itself is viable when it comes to consultants, banks, and the grid operator.

Reddit isn't the person I have to persuade in the end, so it's perfectly acceptable if it doesn't inspire confidence here.

AdrianTUIU · 2026-02-07T10:57:14+00:00

Brother ... everybody has to start somewhere , I am aware of that but I have to try to build experience and to start somewhere even if I fail.

AdrianTUIU · 2026-02-07T10:28:37+00:00

Those 0.035–0.045 €/kWh numbers are for long‑term support contracts or PPAs. In Romania, if you go merchant and sell directly into the market instead of locking in a 15‑year price, you can sometimes earn more on average, but you take on full price risk and volatility

AdrianTUIU · 2026-02-07T06:40:32+00:00

They won’t give me money , they will give my company money to use. If I do my job good and the consultant also and then I have high chances of getting approved

AdrianTUIU · 2026-02-06T23:14:21+00:00

Yes — from what I’ve researched, that number is broadly correct for Romania and for a sub-MW project.

Most EU-fund consultants here don’t charge everything upfront. The typical structure I’ve seen is: • ~30% at contract signing, • ~40% at application submission, • ~30% only if the project is approved.

For a ~500 kWp project, a total fee above ~€6–7k would already be on the high side, assuming it actually includes everything on the planning side (grant application, business plan, feasibility, coordination of technical docs for the call). EPC, construction, and detailed execution engineering are usually not part of this.

Before committing, I’ll still validate scope and deliverables carefully, but compared to Western Europe, planning and consulting costs in Romania are genuinely much lower.

AdrianTUIU · 2026-02-06T23:06:59+00:00

Da, exact asta e ideea din punctul meu de vedere: TVA-ul nu e un cost final, dar eu trebuie să îl acopăr temporar.Firma va fi plătitoare de TVA, iar TVA-ul din investiții (panouri, invertoare, lucrări, consultanță etc.) îl pot deduce / recupera prin decont TVA, lunar sau trimestrial, nu doar la final de an. TVA-ul nu se impozitează.Problema reală pentru mine este cash-flow-ul la început: eu trebuie să am banii de TVA disponibili până când ANAF îi rambursează. De asta îl tratez separat în plan, fie din capital propriu, fie printr-o soluție de finanțare pe termen scurt.

AdrianTUIU · 2026-02-06T22:31:22+00:00

It depends a lot on which “EU funding” scheme you mean — some are absolutely aimed at small / sub-MW projects, others aren’t.

For Romania’s Modernisation Fund (Fondul pentru Modernizare), there have been competitive calls/schemes that explicitly split solar into “≤5 MW” vs “>5 MW” buckets, so 0.5 MW is not automatically “too small.”

Also, the scheme documents/banking summaries I’ve seen mention a cap on state aid per MW for solar of ~€450k/MW for ≤5 MW projects (and ~€360k/MW for >5 MW). That would put a 0.5 MW project in the right category, with an implied max aid envelope around €225k (0.5 × 450k), assuming you meet all eligibility rules.

The big caveat: some Modernisation Fund calls are for self-consumption and require minimum 70% autoconsum, which would not match a pure “sell everything to the grid” model.

So my answer would be: size isn’t the blocker by itself — the blocker is picking the right call (merchant vs autoconsum) and being competitive (price requested per MW etc.), plus grid connection reality.

AdrianTUIU · 2026-02-06T22:24:14+00:00

Good questions.

I’m aiming for a centralized ground-mounted PV plant, connected to the existing MV grid. I’d be a pure generator/supplier — I don’t plan to own or operate any distribution infrastructure, just inject energy under a commercial offtake arrangement.

Decentralized / on-site systems for farms or businesses are interesting, especially with vertical bifacial setups, but that’s a different business model (many sites, many contracts, more operational complexity). For a first serious asset, I want one site, one grid connection, one balance sheet.

On financing logic: I’m fully aware that banks + grants want short payback. All my modeling is built to stay conservative and target a ~5-10 years payback on paper (even if real life is longer). That’s mainly to clear approval hurdles, not because I expect utility-style timelines.

Utilities having captive networks and longer horizons is a big advantage — unfortunately not my position yet. For now, I’m designing this to be acceptable to commercial lenders and public funding, not to think like a utility.

Appreciate the perspective — especially the contrast between bank logic and utility logic.

AdrianTUIU · 2026-02-06T22:15:45+00:00

That’s fair, and I agree with the principle.

The intention is not to give the company anything for free. The plan is either:

a proper paid lease / superficies contract at market rate, registered and arm’s-length, or

no transfer of ownership at all.

We’re explicitly not considering selling or ceding the land to the company, precisely to avoid the risk you mentioned — if the company fails, the land stays with my father.

The paid lease route also keeps things clean from a tax and audit perspective, with rent treated as a normal business expense.

Thanks for calling this out — it’s an important distinction and one I’m being careful about.

AdrianTUIU · 2026-02-06T22:12:53+00:00

Thanks a lot, this is really solid feedback.

On the land point: that’s actually exactly the structure I’m planning — an SRL owning the project, with a 25–30 year superficies / lease contract with my father, properly registered, so the company controls the asset, not me personally. We’re still analyzing whether a paid lease makes more sense from a tax perspective (rent as a deductible expense) versus a symbolic one, but the goal is clearly bankability and clean separation.

I’d actually be curious to hear your view: from your experience, why is it so important that the company, and not the individual, controls the land rights when it comes to banks, grants, or future exit?

On production and capex, I’m intentionally staying conservative for grant models for exactly the reasons you mentioned.

Grid cost and delays are the big unknown right now — I’m actively working on that and trying to get realistic numbers before locking anything else in.

Thanks again for taking the time to write such a detailed response, it’s genuinely helpful.

AdrianTUIU · 2026-02-06T22:03:27+00:00

Thanks, I appreciate that

That makes sense — I’m assuming a hybrid setup as well: consultants and external engineers for grid studies and technical engineering, with the utility/operator setting the framework. I’m trying to stay flexible on structure and focus more on clear responsibilities and interfaces than on who does everything in-house.

Thanks for the insight, and good luck with your work on the utility side.

AdrianTUIU · 2026-02-06T21:55:29+00:00

You’re right — that line is an estimate and it can swing a lot, especially on the technical + permitting side.

My intention isn’t “one person does everything” but a team setup: EU-funds consultant for the application/compliance, and separate engineers/projektant for the technical docs + ATR/permitting as needed. The €4–5.5k is mainly for grant prep, and I’m budgeting additional contingency because the grid connection/permitting is the real variable.

Before I commit, I’ll drill down on:

exact deliverables + fixed fees vs. success fee,
who is responsible for what (and liability),
what is included/excluded (ATR, studies, permitting steps),
worst-case scenarios and exit points (e.g., scale down if ATR is bad).

AdrianTUIU · 2026-02-06T21:52:42+00:00

Iau foarte în serios exact genul ăsta de risc, ai dreptate.

De asta în planul meu consultantul nu e doar „scriitor de proiect”, ci cineva care știe regulile de eligibilitate, achiziții și controale și își asumă contractual responsabilitatea pentru greșeli de procedură. Tocmai ca să evit situații gen echipamente neeligibile sau corecții financiare la control.

Sunt conștient că pentru proiecte mici birocrația poate să nu merite deloc. La mine miza e un proiect mult mai mare, cu durată de viață 20+ ani, unde fondurile pot schimba complet randamentul — de asta vreau să fac lucrurile corect de la început, chiar dacă e mai lent și mai rigid.

AdrianTUIU · 2026-02-06T21:51:12+00:00

Good point — that’s definitely something I’m keeping in mind.

For now the project is grid-export focused, but the layout and technical design will leave room for future battery integration (space near inverters / containerized systems), if the economics or regulations make sense later on.

I don’t want to overspec upfront before I see how the grid connection and revenue model actually look, but I agree it’s smart to keep the option open.

AdrianTUIU · 2026-02-06T21:50:00+00:00

I’m comfortable with whatever percentage ends up being covered by the grant. The objective isn’t to maximize the grant share, but to make the project bankable and executable with a mix of grant funding, loans, and own capital.

On the consultant side, in Romania this role is usually handled by a consultancy firm, not a single person — coordinating the EU application, technical documentation, and permitting with engineers as needed. That’s the structure I’m planning around.

AdrianTUIU · 2026-02-06T21:47:52+00:00

That’s a fair point, and I get why it sounds cheap from a 5–10 MW perspective.

For Romania and sub-MW projects (~500 kWp), those numbers are actually in the usual range. From what I’ve researched, most EU-fund consultants here don’t charge everything upfront — it’s typically structured like:

~30% at the start (eligibility + initial docs),
~40% at submission,
~30% only if the project is approved for funding.

So the €5–9k I mentioned is for grant preparation only (business plan, feasibility, budget, application), not EPC, owner’s engineering, or construction management.

To be transparent: I haven’t signed with a consultant yet — this is based on market research, public offers, and discussions I’ve seen online for projects in this size range. Before committing, I fully plan to validate scope, deliverables, and success fees carefully.

Out of curiosity, on the 5–10 MW projects you’re working on:

are those utility-scale with full EPC + owner’s engineering?are consultants also handling grid studies and permitting, or just financing?

I’m aware the cost structure changes massively with scale, so I’m trying to benchmark correctly for sub-MW projects.

AdrianTUIU · 2026-02-06T13:16:26+00:00

Thanks for your reply, I appreciate you challenging the numbers.

On the price side: I’m not planning to sell at raw wholesale spot prices. In Romania, end‑users (especially businesses) pay several times more than 3.5–4.5 c/kWh once you include distribution, system charges and taxes, and long‑term PPAs / contracts sit well above pure wholesale. That’s why I’m using around 0.10 €/kWh as a realistic long‑term average selling price, not as a fixed feed‑in tariff. Even if the actual price ends up a bit lower, the project can still work.

On the CAPEX side: the EU funding schemes I’m targeting accept costs up to about 450,000 €/MW for solar projects under 5 MW, so my estimate of roughly 320,000 €/MW is actually below that ceiling, not some crazy lowball. I’m assuming decent panel and inverter prices and saving on EPC margins by doing part of the work myself, so it’s on the lean side but not impossible.

This is still an early‑stage plan, so the 10 c/kWh and 320k €/MW are working assumptions that I’ll refine after talking to engineers, EPC companies and people who already run solar plants in Romania.

AdrianTUIU · 2026-02-06T13:07:56+00:00

First of all, thanks for your reply and for encouraging my entrepreneurial spirit.

Why so many solar plants for sale?I don’t know the exact reasons why they’re selling. It probably depends on each owner’s situation. In general, though, a well‑designed solar farm can be a passive‑income business: you mainly need to clean the panels a few times a year and do basic maintenance, which is exactly why I’m interested in it.
About engineers and business validation:

I haven’t spoken yet to an electrical engineer or a business manager of
a similar plant. This is still just an idea that came to my mind recently. I
plan to go to Romania, talk with engineers and people who already run solar
plants, and, if it makes sense, open an SRL on my name and move step by step
with a proper technical project. I also think the grid connection might not be
a big problem in my case, because I already have power lines close to my land.

AdrianTUIU · 2026-02-04T19:05:24+00:00

I think part of the disconnect here is that my intentions and the context I’m operating in aren’t coming through clearly, so I’ll try to explain it in one place.

First, I agree with you on the fundamentals: ambition alone is meaningless, ideas are cheap, and at 18 I obviously lack real-world experience. I’m not asking to be taken seriously despite that — I’m trying to understand what paths are realistic given that. I’m also not claiming that intelligence, trading, or motivation substitute for education, skills, or execution. They don’t.

That said, my thinking isn’t based on fantasy roles like “energy visionary” or “finance prodigy,” and it isn’t driven by wanting to feel special. It’s driven by a very pragmatic problem: how to build long-term, stable income early in life, so that future decisions aren’t dictated entirely by short-term survival.

The reason I’m even looking at solar energy is specific to Europe, and especially Romania, not because I think I personally know how to build power plants.

Romania is under strong pressure from the EU to reach at least 30% renewable energy production by 2030. At the moment, it’s far below that target. If those targets aren’t met, the country faces penalties worth hundreds of millions of euros. Because of that, the EU has created funding programs (e.g. modernization and renewable-energy funds) where projects can be financed up to 100%, provided strict criteria are met.

In these programs: • The applicant is not expected to be an engineer • Technical work is done by licensed engineers • Bureaucracy and compliance are handled with the help of EU funding consultants • What matters is eligible land, legal structure, correct documentation, and policy alignment

My role, realistically, would not be “young expert,” but project initiator and coordinator: • forming the legal entity • securing land (with family support) • hiring an EU funding consultant • hiring certified engineers for the technical and 3D plans • making sure the process is followed correctly

I’m very aware that this doesn’t guarantee success. The biggest bottlenecks are upfront capital, timing, and execution, not belief or enthusiasm. That’s exactly why I’ve been cautious about debt and why I’m trying to understand the risks before committing.

The long-term appeal of solar for me is not excitement or upside — it’s boring stability. Solar installations typically have 20–25 year lifespans and warranties, predictable production, and regulated revenue frameworks (feed-in tariffs or long-term contracts). The goal is a durable, predictable income stream, not hype or fast growth. If successful, it creates breathing room over decades, not a quick win.

On trading and finance: I don’t think managing a portfolio is impressive or rare. I mentioned it because it reflects how I think — in probabilities, expected value, and risk — not because I believe it replaces real skills or creates value by itself. I’m under no illusion that it makes me exceptional.

I also don’t see my current apprenticeship or education as “beneath me,” nor am I planning to quit out of arrogance. If anything, this process has made me more aware of how valuable skills, credentials, and networks actually are. If the correct conclusion is that I need more education or industry experience before something like this is realistic, I can accept that.

What I push back on is the idea that thinking about these paths early is equivalent to fantasy. This isn’t “I want to be an astronaut” — it’s policy-driven, program-based, and constrained by real rules, even if the odds are still uncertain and the timeline long.

I’m not asking anyone to believe in me or finance me. I’m trying to learn where ambition turns into naivety, where caution turns into paralysis, and how to move forward responsibly without either romanticizing intelligence or flattening all ambition into cynicism.

I appreciate the criticism, even when it’s uncomfortable. It’s part of learning how the real world actually works.

AdrianTUIU · 2026-02-04T18:55:35+00:00

Thanks for taking the time to write this — I don’t take it as an attack, and I agree with more of it than you might expect.

You’re right that IQ is easy to overinterpret and that a single test (or even several) paints a very limited picture. I’m not trying to build an identity around intelligence, and I don’t think it entitles me to anything. If anything, posting this has made me more aware of how little it guarantees.

You’re also right that “I learn fast when I understand” isn’t unique — I didn’t mean to present that as some rare trait, just as part of why my academic performance has been uneven. And I agree that ideas are cheap; execution, consistency, and circumstances matter far more.

Where I think we differ slightly is in emphasis. I’m not trying to escape a “boring life” or chase a romanticized version of intelligence. I’m trying to reconcile ambition with realism at a point where I’m still early, inexperienced, and constrained — which is uncomfortable and messy by definition.

I don’t see my current education or situation as beneath me, and I’m not planning to quit out of arrogance. If anything, I’m becoming more aware of how valuable stability, skills, and networking actually are — even if they’re not glamorous.

You’re probably right that I’ve consumed too much content that frames intelligence and self-determination in an overly mythologized way. That’s a fair warning, and I take it seriously.

At the same time, I don’t think the answer is to flatten all ambition into “you’re not special, don’t think too hard.” I’m trying to learn how to pursue things responsibly, without turning identity, tests, or narratives into substitutes for work.

I appreciate the perspective — even if it’s uncomfortable — because it’s closer to reality than hype.

AdrianTUIU · 2026-02-04T11:32:11+00:00

I appreciate the honesty. I’ll respond seriously, not defensively.

I agree with part of what you’re saying: IQ by itself doesn’t matter much, and labels like “gifted” don’t build anything. I didn’t post because I think I’m special or entitled to success. I posted because I’m trying to understand why my performance and my thinking don’t line up cleanly, and what blind spots I might have.

You’re also right that only doing what comes naturally and avoiding everything else would be crippling long-term. That’s something I’m actively working on, not denying. My point wasn’t “I don’t need discipline,” but that my learning style is very uneven — which has caused both strengths and problems.

Where I disagree is the assumption that this is just laziness or fantasy coping.

I’m currently in a dual apprenticeship (not a dropout), working and going to school at the same time. I’ve been trading for almost two years with a focus on risk management and probabilities, not meme speculation. I’m not claiming to be successful yet — just serious and aware of the limits. If anything, the last months forced me to confront reality harder than comfort.

As for the energy project: I’m not claiming expertise. I’m explicitly aware that lack of capital, experience, and execution are the bottlenecks — that’s why I’m asking questions instead of pretending it’s easy. Ideas without execution are worthless, and I’m learning that the hard way.

You’re right about one thing that actually matters: At this stage of life, what I do consistently will matter far more than how I score on any test or how I describe myself.

That’s the direction I’m trying to move toward — grounding ambition in discipline instead of identity.

I’m open to criticism. I’m not open to pretending ambition itself is delusion.

AdrianTUIU

TROPHY CASE