This piece is co-authored with Dr. Gary Dirks
Kosovo's energy transition is at a standstill. Between trying to live up to the standards of industrial countries and meeting the needs of its citizens, the tiny country of 1.8 million is grappling with the growing global pressure to adopt alternative energy strategies. This means moving away from low-cost coal-powered fuel, which currently supplies 97 percent of the country's energy via two outdated lignite powered plants (Kosovo A and Kosovo B). Everyone agrees cleaner energy is the best solution for Kosovo, but the lack of funding and time make the choice much more complex.
In June, the Kosovo Electric Company (KEK), a state-run company that oversees Kosovo's energy sector, including Kosovo A and Kosovo B power plants, organized a conference in Prishtina to discuss the challenges of transitioning to a new clean energy system. In the conference, Dr. Gary Dirks outlined at least three principles that should ideally guide any country's transition to renewable energy:
- Continuity: No matter how well-intentioned, taking steps toward a national renewable energy system must not leave gaps in energy availability even for short periods of time.
- Equality: The burden of the energy transition cannot fall disproportionately on lesser developed countries and disadvantaged populations within a country.
- Climate-focused: The new system must reduce emissions of greenhouse gases consistent with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change targets.
However, not all three principles can be followed in all cases, as in the case of Kosovo. Therefore Kosovo must find a solution that fits the current economic, political, and social reality of the state.
Since 2008, when Kosovo declared its independence, economic growth has slowed to almost a complete standstill, reliance on remittances has increased, and trade imbalances have expanded. According to the UN Development Programme (UNDP), Kosovo's unemployment rate is 35 percent in the general population and as high as 60 percent among youth. More than 29 percent of the population live below the poverty line. Kosovo's economic development is further hindered by its antiquated energy sector. According to the World Bank, "Kosovo's outdated electricity system is inadequate and unreliable, posing significant challenges to economic growth and development. Frequent power outages hinder investment and disrupt manufacturing, education, and health services."
Kosovo A has a 345 megawatt capacity that is more than 50 years old and considered by many to be one of Europe's biggest sources of pollution. If it suddenly stops running -- which is well within the realm of possibility -- it poses a potential threat to an already fragile economy. In 2014, the power plant exploded, killing two people and injuring thirteen others. It is a hazard to the environment, the economy, and the KEK workers who operate the plant. KEK's second plant, Kosovo B, was built in the mid-1980s, and has a 540 megawatt capacity. Both power plants are in constant need of repair. The fact that they continue to function is a testament to the ingenuity and commitment of the men and women who manage and maintain them.
At the heart of the issue is what transitional energy strategy should Kosovo pursue as it attempts to decommission Kosovo A, a European Commission request, in 2017? The Kosovo government is proposing to replace Kosovo A with a new 400 megawatt coal-powered plant: Kosovo C. Kosovo C would also rely on lignite for power, but, as the government notes, it will be built with updated, cleaner coal technology thereby reducing pollution levels. This proposed transition is not only cost-effective but provides a quicker steady flow of energy to its citizens, businesses, hospitals, and schools. The Kosovo government has asked the World Bank for funding. As of this writing the World Bank has not made a decision. Environmentalists, who see the closing down of Kosovo A as an opportunity for Kosovo to transition from coal to a green energy system (for example, solar or wind energy), have called upon the World Bank to stick to their pledge not to fund coal-powered plants and thereby not fund Kosovo C. They instead recommend funds be used to support green energy projects. Although everyone agrees that Kosovo should transition to renewable energy sooner rather than later, many question whether Kosovo can develop and operate such a system within a time period that recognizes the risks the current system creates.
At the moment the Kosovo government and environmentalists find themselves at opposite ends of the energy transition strategy. If, as most sustainability experts believe, access to electricity is a basic human right, both the government and the environmentalist organizations have a moral and legal obligation that their energy strategies "do no harm" to current and future generations. This means keeping the lights on while an alternative energy system is being implemented. This means pursuing diverse energy sources and solutions, including wind, solar, pumped storage, and new lignite. This means the Kosovars choose how they will move forward. The only wrong choice is maintaining the status quo.