Coal remains one of the most difficult issues in the Western Balkans electricity sector, even as it is often described as outdated. Replacing the role coal still plays is presented as more complex than a technology change. In several systems across the region, coal provides domestic electricity, employment, system inertia, dispatchable capacity and political security.
Coal’s position is described as embedded in regional power systems and in broader economic and social structures. As a result, the coal transition is framed as a political economy challenge rather than a straightforward equipment swap. The region’s exposure is also highlighted by research into Western Balkan energy sector reliance on coal.
Coal reliance across Western Balkan power systems
Research cited in the source indicates that Kosovo, Serbia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, North Macedonia and Montenegro have relied heavily on coal for electricity generation. Albania is identified as the major exception due to its hydropower-based system. This distribution shapes how reliability and generation adequacy are discussed across national grids.
The source describes a reliability dilemma tied to coal plant performance and system needs. Coal plants are said to be aging, often inefficient and emissions-intensive, yet they still provide firm generation when hydro output is weak. The same firm role is also linked to periods when imports are expensive or solar generation is unavailable.
It also states that closing coal capacity without replacing its system role would create security-of-supply risk. This reliability concern is positioned alongside other pressures affecting coal economics and financing. The discussion then shifts to carbon costs connected to EU market access.
CBAM exposure and export competitiveness
The economics of coal are described as weakening as carbon costs become more relevant to trade flows. The source points to the EU Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) exposing carbon-intensive electricity exports to additional costs when sold into the EU. It adds that Reuters reported electricity from coal-reliant Western Balkan producers is likely to become more expensive for EU importers under CBAM.
That effect is described as reducing competitiveness in EU markets for those exporters. Exports are said to have historically supported utility revenues in some countries, creating a potential commercial buffer for coal plant operators. If coal-based exports become less attractive, domestic plants could lose part of that buffer while still being needed for local supply.
The source further links reduced export appeal to financing constraints for coal assets. It says coal plants may become harder to finance, modernize and justify even if they remain technically required for local generation adequacy. Pollution rules are then presented as an additional driver of investment pressure.
Environmental compliance and financing constraints
Pollution rules are described as adding pressure because many coal assets require investment to meet environmental standards. At the same time, lenders are said to be increasingly reluctant to finance coal projects. Even where coal remains technically available, the source says cost of capital and compliance burden are rising.
The transition challenge is described as not only whether coal faces pressure but what replaces its firm capacity function. The source frames this replacement problem as central to maintaining reliability while reducing reliance on single-fuel generation. It then evaluates which resource types can contribute to that firming role.
Solar alone and wind alone are described as unable to replace the function by themselves. Hydro is said to help but hydrology is uncertain, while gas can provide flexibility but introduces fuel-price and import-dependence risks. Batteries are described as essential for short-duration flexibility but not fully replacing multi-day firm capacity.
Flexibility portfolio needed for firm capacity replacement
The source also describes demand response as able to reduce peaks, but only with market design and consumer participation. It presents a realistic transition pathway as requiring a portfolio covering renewables, storage, grid upgrades and regional market integration. Flexible hydro and limited flexible thermal backup are also included in that portfolio description.
Other elements listed include demand response, energy efficiency and targeted support for coal regions. The source adds that domestic carbon-pricing discussions are needed because paying carbon costs at the EU border is described as less useful than recycling revenues into local transition measures. It then moves from system planning to social impacts tied to closures.
Social impacts and investment timing in coal regions
The social dimension is described as requiring investment before closures rather than after them in coal regions. Workers are said to need retraining, municipalities need alternative tax bases, and utilities need credible investment plans. The source warns that a disorderly transition would increase political resistance and threaten security of supply.
For investors, the source describes coal-transition risk as both downside and opportunity within replacement infrastructure planning. Downside is identified as stranded assets, rising compliance costs and export-market erosion. Opportunity is identified through renewables, batteries, transmission, district heating modernization, mine-land repurposing and flexible capacity.
For governments, delay without preparation is identified as the worst strategy in the source framing. It says aging coal assets do not become more reliable with time and that CBAM does not disappear due to domestic politics difficulties. Waiting is described as compressing the transition into a shorter period that would be more expensive.
Reliability shift from single-fuel dependence
The source states that coal may remain part of the Western Balkans power mix for some time while its strategic position weakens. It also says future systems will still need reliability but increasingly from flexibility portfolios rather than single-fuel dependence. Coal’s last stronghold is described as not generation volume but firm capacity.
The role that replaces this firm capacity function is presented as the key requirement for the region’s transition planning under the pressures outlined across reliability needs, carbon exposure and financing constraints.
Elevated by virtu.energy
