Advanced Materials for Renewable Energy and Energy Storage Systems
Are proposals submitted under the EIC Accelerator Challenges WP 2026 - Advanced Materials for Renewable Energy and Energy Storage Systems call required to include a Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) as an attachment, or to present LCA-related data within the proposal itself?
Yes, they are required to provide a Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) in the proposal itself.
Does the EIC Accelerator Challenges WP 2026 - Advanced Materials for Renewable Energy and Energy Storage Systems call - consider materials related to semiconductors, such as those used for energy harvesting, sensors, wearables, conformable electronics, flexible electronics, and IoT applications?
The challenge is strictly related to technologies for renewable energy sources and mid long-term storage. It does not deal with wearable sensors or conformable electronics.
Are there any restrictions, or limitations, on the use of critical raw materials (CRMs) in the proposals submitted to this challenge?
There is no specific CRM. The proposal simply needs to comply with what are the challenge requirements as stated in the EIC Work Programme 2026.
Would a hydrogen technology that focuses on improving the quality of hydrogen for off-takers be considered a deep tech innovation?
It would depend on the deep tech content of the proposal related to the hydrogen technology aiming at improving the quality of hydrogen for off-takers.
Would biogas or biomethane, produced from organic matter such as agricultural waste, food waste, or sewage sludge, be considered a form of renewable energy or energy storage for the purposes of this Challenge in Advanced Materials for Renewable Energy and Energy Storage Systems?
No, in this case, biogas or biomethane would not be considered a form of renewable energy, or energy storage for the purpose of this challenge, because they are not advanced materials.
Are materials that can be used as coatings to enhance energy efficiency in buildings, such as thermal insulation coatings, be considered within the scope of this challenge?
No, materials that can be potentially used for coatings to enhance energy efficiency in buildings, e.g., thermal insulation coatings, cannot be considered within the scope of this challenge because the definition for renewable energy sources cannot be applied in this case.
Alternative Concepts and Key Enabling Technologies for Fusion Power Plants
Given that the allocated budget of €20 million for the EIC Accelerator Challenge - Alternative Concepts and Key Enabling Technologies for Fusion Power Plants can potentially be exhausted by just two companies applying for the maximum grant and equity? Is the budget allocated on first come first serve basis or are the 20me split between application dates?
We expect to be able to fund 3-4 companies with this budget, with a rough split over the two application dates. If the budget will be fully used the remaining proposals that are selected by the juries will compete with proposals from the open part.
Are technologies that enable the construction and licensing of fusion reactors considered in scope for the EIC Accelerator Challenges WP 2026 -Alternative Concepts and Key Enabling Technologies for Fusion Power Plants call? Additionally, if a proposed technology has applications in both fusion and fission reactors, is it still eligible for funding under this challenge, or is the focus exclusively on fusion reactor technologies?
The challenge deals with deep tech. If technologies, that enable the construction and licensing of fusion reactors, are deep tech, then, they will be considered in scope for Alternative Concepts and Key Enabling Technologies for Fusion Power Plants. All the technologies that comply with the challenge need to be deep tech technologies. The Challenge is focused only on fusion, and not on fission.
Given the high costs associated with fusion technology development and the focus on supporting SMEs, are there any constraints or requirements regarding the proportion of eligible costs that must be incurred directly within the awarded company, as opposed to being sub-contracted to third-party providers?
Subcontracting should always be a minor part of the overall costs.
What is the maximum Technology Readiness Level (TRL) that a project is expected to achieve within the 24-month timeframe of the EIC Accelerator program? Given that the minimum TRL is 4, is it expected that projects will reach TRL 8, or is a lower TRL, such as TRL 6 or 7, considered sufficient? And what types of evidence will be expected from participants to demonstrate their technology's maturity?
Proposals whose technologies start with TRL4 (or, it could also start at TRL 5 or 6) will be evaluated in alignment with the evaluation criteria required for this Challenge, Alternative Concepts and Key Enabling Technologies for Fusion Power Plants. The evidence provided will be proof of the TRL achieved which will not have to be necessarily TRL 8 as for other Accelerator challenges. Please consult the EIC 2026 Work Programme for your reference.
For non-EU applicants, how is the "strategic relevance" of a project evaluated when it supports Critical Raw Material (CRM) goals indirectly through circularity and efficiency measures, and what specific criteria are prioritized in the evaluation process?
Proposals will be evaluated against the evaluation criteria according to the EIC 2026 Work Programme and will be judged in the light of the scope and specific objectives of the related challenge, Alternative Concepts and Key Enabling Technologies for Fusion Power Plants. Only the explicited priorities will be applied, consult EIC Work Programme 2026.
How the requirement that "at least 50% of the indicative budget will be provided to legal entities established in Member States or countries associated to both Euratom and Horizon Europe" will be implemented in practice, such as: how will the budget be allocated to ensure that at least 50% goes to eligible entities?
For the proposals which are evaluated positively by the jury, it will be checked if the mentioned requirement is met before they get a definitive "go".
Given that the challenge is specifically asking for innovative solutions in the area of fusion technology, would a project that delivers a conceptual or engineering design of a fusion technology, but does not necessarily involve constructing, or testing, a physical prototype, be considered sufficient to meet the EIC's requirements?
No, it would not. A project that delivers a conceptual or engineering design of a fusion technology but does not necessarily involve the construction, or testing, of a physical prototype does not comply with the definition of TRL4 or higher TRLs.
Biotech for Regenerating Agricultural Soils
Are robotic vertical farms, which use automated systems and controlled environments to produce vegetables, considered an eligible area for funding under this Biotech Challenge?
Robotic vertical farms, which use automated systems and controlled environments to produce vegetables do not comply with the requirements of the Biotech for regenerating agriculture soils challenge. However, such proposal could be in line with challenge call 'Deep tech for Climate Adaptation - specific objective: Climate Smart Agriculture' if proposed solution addresses, appropriately, those specific objectives of the challenge.
For innovations, related to Biotech for Regenerating Agricultural Soils call, that have the potential to deliver combined impacts across multiple sectors, such as agriculture, waste reduction, and climate mitigation, should applicants focus their proposal strictly on the soils challenge, or is it acceptable to take a more holistic, multi-sector systems approach that addresses the interconnectedness of these challenges?
Challenge proposals could have a broader impact. However, specific objectives of the challenge must be addressed properly.
Can soil-enhancing carbon materials produced from high-moisture organic residues, using an integrated biological pre-treatment and thermochemical conversion, be considered within the scope of the EIC Accelerator call in Biotech for Regenerating Agricultural Soils if they can demonstrate improvements in soil structure, water retention, and nutrient efficiency?
Biotech solutions within this challenge can be supported by different types of Key Enabling Technologies, KET.
Does a bio-stimulant solution, specifically a peat replacement product derived from upcycled waste milk, align with the scope and objectives of the EIC Accelerator challenge, and are the integration of Artificial Intelligence (AI), Machine Learning (ML), and sensor technologies considered essential or desirable components for eligibility?
Yes, it does. Proposed solutions could leverage different Key Enabling Technologies, KET.
Is it possible for a company that wants to scale up rapidly to participate in this challenge with an investment-only option, meaning they would not receive a grant but just equity?
Yes, it is. Asking for equity only is an option for all the open and challenges proposals.
Although our deep-tech innovation is rooted in physics, its primary impact and application are in the biological sciences, specifically in the areas of plant health, biological crop treatments, and soil microbiology. Given this intersection of physics and biology, are we likely to be considered eligible for this Challenge in Biotech for Regenerating Agricultural Soils?
As indicated in the title of the challenge, this challenge primarily seeks biotech solutions aiming to address specific objectives of the challenge. Proposed solutions could leverage different non-biotech KET - Key Enabling Technologies.
We are a company at Technology Readiness Level (TRL) 5-6, developing a circular and zero-emission biotechnology solution. Our technology uses agricultural residues to produce bio-fertilizers and a novel organic insecticide that has no EU equivalent. Would our proposal be eligible for support from the European Innovation Council (EIC) Accelerator program?
Additionally, which of the 2026 challenges would be the best fit for our project: the 'Biotech for Regenerating Agricultural Soils' challenge or the 'Deep Tech for Climate' challenge’?
That would depend on how the proposal is structured, and the type of impact it is supposed to produce.
Are processes like pyrolysis, which convert plastic into biofuel, eligible for financing under this program, and if so, what specific requirements or criteria must be met to qualify for funding?
As indicated in the title of the challenge, this challenge primarily seeks biotech solutions aiming to address specific objectives of the challenge. Pyrolysis for obtaining biofuel from plastic is not in the scope of this challenge.
Boosting the European Critical Raw Materials value chain
Does the EIC Accelerator Challenge - Boosting the European Critical Raw Materials value chain call - support the development of machines or technologies focused on manufacturing products from recycled materials, or is the scope limited to other areas of recycling or sustainability?
The challenge is focussed on gaining access to Critical Raw Materials, CRM. Therefore, machines that are developed in support of that objective are in scope. Machines for the manufacturing of products from recycled materials is out of scope.
Does the EIC Accelerator Challenges WP 2026 focus exclusively on the raw materials listed in the EU Critical Raw Materials Act, or does it also cover secondary raw materials, such as those obtained through recycling or urban mining?
If so, are there any specific priorities or areas of focus within the domain of secondary raw materials, such as developing new recycling technologies or improving the efficiency of existing recycling processes?
Critical Raw Materials and the subset of Strategic Raw Materials as mentioned in the CRMA that are recovered from primary or secondary sources (i.e. recycling) are all in scope of this Challenge.
Would the development of new materials that aim to replace certain critical raw materials be considered eligible for this challenge Boosting the European Critical Raw Materials value chain?
The objective of this Challenge is to secure access in EU to Critical and Strategic Raw Materials. Novel materials that substitute these Critical and Strategic Raw Materials are important but are outside the scope of this Challenge.
Is there a specific plan in place for each EU country to extract or import raw materials, in order to supply final products to industries of interest, considering the EU's resource development strategies and research initiatives, such as the RESourceEU? (RESourceEU is a new program designed to secure raw materials and promote recycling policy)
The policy context of this Challenge is the Critical Raw Materials Act. Targets and national strategies are part of the implementation of the CRMA.
Is a company that uses biomass (such as algae or vegetables) to recycle lithium-ion batteries and recover valuable raw materials like graphite, nickel, manganese, and cobalt with high yield, a good fit for this challenge in Boosting the EU Critical Raw Materials value chain?
The Challenge is open to deep-tech startups that develop technologies including biobased technologies to extract and recycle critical and strategic raw materials within the policy context of the CRMA.
Deep Tech for Climate Adaptation
Does the climate-smart agriculture objective under the Deep Tech for Climate Adaptation call include the development of sustainable fertilizers using biotech or microbial solutions, as mentioned in the 'microbial solutions and bio stimulants' bullet point in the EIC WP? If so, are there any specific requirements or priorities for these types of solutions, such as reducing synthetic fertilizer use or promoting soil health?
Microbial solutions and bio stimulants are in scope of second specific objective of the challenge only if they are enhancing climate resilience.
Is ocean pollution, specifically plastics, within the scope of this Deep Tech for Climate Adaptation call, particularly when it comes to the collection, recycling, and manufacturing of products from those materials?
Ocean pollution, specifically collection, recycling of plastics and manufacturing of products from those materials is not within the scope of Deep Tech for Climate Adaptation call. However, you can support the ocean ecosystem by addressing specific objective 'Combating water scarcity' with wastewater processing and water filtration systems sensitive to emerging pollutants.
How can asset management be financed, considering that damage to buildings and infrastructure is the most impacted area (79%), and different countries have varying investment models and fundamental quality requirements? Should it be financed through policy, investment models, or other means?
The Challenge is open for deep tech startups developing technologies supporting adaptation to climate change. Business model questions, such as, finance of asset management is part of the proposition challenges these startups face.
Are materials that can be used as coatings to enhance energy efficiency in buildings, such as thermal insulation coatings or smart coatings that regulate heat transfer, considered within the scope of this challenge In Deep Tech for Climate Adaptation?
The Challenge is looking for ‘climate-neutral solutions that address urban heat island effects and urban cooling’, for example with coating technologies. Therefore, coatings shall primarily offer cooling. Coatings that improve energy efficiency in buildings, but do not address heat islands and urban cooling, are out of scope.
When submitting a proposal for an innovation that addresses both climate-risk reduction and soil resilience, such as improvements in water retention, erosion reduction, or nutrient runoff, should applicants primarily position their proposal under the climate adaptation category, even if the primary mechanism of the innovation is soil-related?
One proposal could address one, or more specific challenges.
Is a biological solution for wastewater treatment that produces biohydrogen, as a byproduct, considered within the focus areas of this challenge in Deep Tech for Climate Adaptation?
Energy production is not a focus of this challenge. Challenge focus of the specific objective: ‘Combating Water scarcity’ is on reuse of water through wastewater processing and water filtration.
Would projects that focus on the impacts of climate change on cultural heritage, such as the effects of rising temperatures, sea-level rise, or extreme weather events on cultural artifacts, sites, or traditions, be considered relevant and eligible for funding under this challenge?
The Challenge supports deep tech startups solving for the stated objectives of climate adaptation. Targeting, or prioritising, the market segment of cultural heritage is an entrepreneurial choice. Cultural heritage is a relevant segment of the built environment.